The Jerryd Bayless "experiment" hasn't even begun
by atomiccafe on Apr 13, 2010 9:38 AM PDT
Email
PrintIf I had a quarter for every time somebody in a Game Day Thread said Jerryd Bayless can't be an NBA point guard, or that we should trade him for an $8 Rose Garden Hefeweizen, I'd have like $30. Somehow it's become common knowledge that the last two months or so of sub-par play has punched Mssr. Bayless's ticket out of town. While Upper Left Corner did a great job canvassing his statistical strengths last month, this post is an attempt to argue from a slightly more qualitative perspective why we shouldn't be pinning the struggles of our substitutes solely on Bayless. Bayless has been put in a position to fail because he and the reserve wings are a poor match, and the units he plays with have a very small amount of perimeter shot creation. Because these factors won't exist if Bayless every becomes a starter (indeed, they shouldn't persist into next year on the bench unit), the case is still very much open as to whether he can "make it" as an NBA point guard.
I) Bayless's strengths and weaknesses are a poor match for our other bench wings
Bayless has a game which is predicated primarily on taking the ball out of the basket, dribbling down the court, putting his head down and getting to the basket. As ULC pointed out, he is great at getting to the foul line and he scores relatively efficiently as a result. On occasion, he will make a really decent drive and kick pass for an assist, or perfectly orchestrate the fast-break. However, his decision-making, court vision and command of the game are obviously not his greatest strengths. This observation garners support from the fact that his best performances (vs. Phoenix, at San Antonio) have come while playing alongside Miller or Blake. The detractors will say this "proves" he will never be a point guard. I disagree. He has gone from a situation that plays to all his strengths (playing as a primary creator with a pass first point guard) to a situation that plays to all his weaknesses.
The reason I write that he is in a situation that plays to all his weaknesses is that the current situation is more difficult than just "playing point guard." Bayless is playing point guard with wings who need an instinctive, pass-first point guard to help them get on track. Neither Webster nor Fernandez can create their own shot, and their offense is primarily predicated on someone else finding them for either open perimeter shots or cuts to the basket. To make matters worse, they are below average ballhandlers for their respective positions, so Bayless finds no help from either in running the point or making decisions. Although Fernandez occasionally makes spectacular alley-oop passes, and Martell can look like a world beater driving to the hoop, both struggle mightily with their handle when faced with any sort of pressure. This puts all the ballhandling duties on Bayless's shoulders, something he is not prepared for. The situation also harms Fernandez' and Webster's performances, as they don't have a consistent supply of good passes to get their offense going.
II) Our reserve lineups have very little perimeter shot creation
To make matters worse, Bayless is not only saddled with handling all the duties associated with handling the ball and initiating the offense, he is also the only perimeter bench player who can get his own shot. His baskets are assisted 38% of the time, while Rudy is at 75% and Martell 82% (Hoopdata). Basically, Bayless has to dribble the ball up the court, initiate the offensive progressions, and if everything breaks down, he's responsible for creating something at the shot clock buzzer.
The counterargument may be that any bench unit is going to have less shot creation than the starters because they just aren't as good. To check on this, I compared Bayless's floor time to that of two reserve rookies who have arguably had more success for contending teams: George Hill and Ty Lawson. Out of the Spurs top 20 units, when Hill is the point guard, either Ginobili or Jefferson is always in the game. Hill gets to play the vast majority of his time with Ginobili, one of the top 5 shooting guards in the league, and someone who is a perfect bailout option for a young point. In a similar vein, Lawson gets to play the vast majority of his point guard minutes alongside J.R. Smith, Carmelo Anthony or both. Anthony, like Ginobili, is a devastating scoring option who you can simply pass the ball to on the wing. Although Smith isn't as effective, he never shies from creating his own shot, which deflects some of Lawson's obligations.
III) Conclusion: conditions for Bayless can not (or should not) stay the same
Because Jerryd Bayless has been put in such a difficult situation, it is impossible to conclusively evaluate his potential as an NBA point guard. If Rudy Fernandez were the shooting guard of the future, we would know full well that Bayless can't be the point guard. However, an attempt to extrapolate from Bayless's performance as a backup point guard has to take into account the extremely poor fit between Webster, Fernandez and Bayless and the lack of offensive firepower from the wing in our reserve unit.
On a note unrelated to Bayless's ability to play point guard, the lack of perimeter shot creation on this team is a red flag going into next year, and an area I would like to see addressed. This is one reason I don't see how we can ship Bayless. Even if he is not the answer at point guard, he has shown an ability to to create his own shot off the bench that we are totally missing otherwise. This team needs more players who can attack the rim off the bench, not less. I would be comfortable with two possible solutions behind Andre next year: bringing in a "steady hand" Blake-style point guard to allow Bayless to play off the ball, or bringing in a bench scorer who can take turns attacking with Bayless. The second is probably favorable, because more weapons is typically better than less. However, it is likely to be more expensive, and possibly not feasible.
205 comments
|
22 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I don;t know about low bbiq
but he does telegraph passes and that drives me nuts!
Bayless needs to work on feeding the post and putting more arc on his outside jumper.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Apr 13, 2010 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions
He does the right thing in drawing three defenders, but then he doesn't know where anybody is so he ends up getting his shot stuffed and looking like a real idiot
I also do not respect his man or his help defense.
Jerryd will get better, but how much better?
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
22 yrs old, exactly 1 season of experience
Go easy on the kid.
Miller = 11 seasons
Roy = 4 seasons
—
And he won the game in San Antonio… plus several others.
Just getting started.
I’m a JB fan…
by JayBlazerFan on Apr 13, 2010 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Could not agree more
Seems like McMillan forcing Bayless to focus on playing PG and seeing the floor. While doing this his offense has suffered, but he is looking for his shooters and starting to see the floor. Seems like his confidence on his shot is a little low.
We saw this year how long it took Andre Miller, a veteran quality PG, to find his way on the Blazers and earn the trust of both the coach and the players on the team. In order for Miller to do what he does he has to be able to make mistakes, miss open shots, excercise the wrong options at times, turn the ball over and not loose playing time. Once the coach started trusting him, everything improved and Miller’s shortcommings faded.
Hopefully next year Bayless will begin to see when it is best to pass the ball and when he needs to go for his own shot. Once he gains McMillan’s trust he will be a much better player.
I thought a high assist rate was a good thing.
When we get a lot of assists, the ball is moving well and shots get easier. Creating your own shot is good when things break down, but I’d rather be known for hitting shots 85% assisted than 38% assisted. In fact, I’m not sure this stat really makes your case at all, other than circumstantially.
And do you throw out the team for a player, or throw out the player for the team. Depends on the player, but so far, Bayless hasn’t shown he’s that player. So the argument that things we need to change for him doesn’t hold that much water.
I don’t mind keeping Bayless around to see what happens next year. But your argument for keeping him is changing my mind.
"[S]ince men enjoyed very great leisure, they used it to pursue many kinds of commodities unknown to their fathers, and that was that first yoke they placed upon themselves without thinking about it, and the first source of evils the prepared for their descendants. For, besides continuing thus to soften body and mind, as these commodities had lost almost all their pleasantness through habit, and as they had at the same time degenerated into true needs, being deprived of them became much more cruel than possessing them was sweet; and people were unhappy to lose them without being happy to have them." -Jean-Jacques Rousseau
you need players who can create scoring opportunities
And although the assisted stat isn’t a perfect proxy for creativity, the players around the league with low assisted s bears out the idea that there is a relationship. Players known as shot creators like Carmelo, LeBron, Wade, Roy and Kobe all have Ast’d %s below 42.
I am fine with shipping out Bayless. What I’m saying is that given the current composition of the team, you probably need to bring in two more shot perimeter shot creators. You have to replace Bayless’s creativity and probably add another one off the bench.
As further evidence that it’s not just Bayless, our bench had similar problems scoring with Blake/Fernandez/Webster type lineups earlier this season. To me, this is evidence that we have a shortage of perimeter shot creation, not just a PG problem.
"Players known as shot creators like Carmelo, LeBron, Wade, Roy and Kobe all have Ast’d %s below 42."
Yes. And so are a lot of chuckers. I think there’s too much noise in that statistic to be of much use in your argument. Though Shavlik Randolph I could believe is a master shot creator, assisted on exactly zero percent of his shots this year. So you could be right. Maybe getting Earl Boykins will give us another shot creator.
I don’t disagree that we could use another shot creator. But I’m not sure we need a chucker. And as it stands right now, Bayless is closer to Boykins than to Steve Nash right now. Of course, we don’t need a Steve Nash coming off of our bench. I think Bayless is fine for that. I just don’t have high expectations for him anymore. If he manages to break out (despite a few false alarms), good for him. But I’m also okay beginning the search for a more reliable PG.
"[S]ince men enjoyed very great leisure, they used it to pursue many kinds of commodities unknown to their fathers, and that was that first yoke they placed upon themselves without thinking about it, and the first source of evils the prepared for their descendants. For, besides continuing thus to soften body and mind, as these commodities had lost almost all their pleasantness through habit, and as they had at the same time degenerated into true needs, being deprived of them became much more cruel than possessing them was sweet; and people were unhappy to lose them without being happy to have them." -Jean-Jacques Rousseau
of course
Players that create a lot of good shots are a commodity. Players that create a lot of bad shots are a liability. That’s why Ellis (35% Ast’d 50% TS) and Boykins (27% Ast’d 50% TS) are rightfully considered chuckers and hurt their teams. Jerryd’s TS is 54%, which is pretty darn good. Saying he’s a chucker isn’t supported by the data. He largely creates reasonably efficient opportunities for himself.
I'm going to reveal my ignorance.
Though it should hardly be a surprise. But is there really that much difference between 50TS% and 54TS%? If so, does Jarrett Jack’s 60TS% and 31% AST’d% make him a better than Bayless? I know there’s the potential argument. But potential is only good when realized. And I think your argument is that Bayless’ potential is not going to be realized the way we’re using him (if I read you correctly).
"[S]ince men enjoyed very great leisure, they used it to pursue many kinds of commodities unknown to their fathers, and that was that first yoke they placed upon themselves without thinking about it, and the first source of evils the prepared for their descendants. For, besides continuing thus to soften body and mind, as these commodities had lost almost all their pleasantness through habit, and as they had at the same time degenerated into true needs, being deprived of them became much more cruel than possessing them was sweet; and people were unhappy to lose them without being happy to have them." -Jean-Jacques Rousseau
A 4% TS difference is substantial. JJ’s 60% this year is phenomenal for a guard, although digesting that stat has to be tempered by two considerations: his 2d best year is 55%, so it is likely an outlier, and he is aided by being the 3d or 4th option on his team when he is on the floor (his useage is only 18% while Bayless is at 25%). The offense allows him to shoot more selectively.
Cool.
I get over my head when it comes to advanced stats.
"[S]ince men enjoyed very great leisure, they used it to pursue many kinds of commodities unknown to their fathers, and that was that first yoke they placed upon themselves without thinking about it, and the first source of evils the prepared for their descendants. For, besides continuing thus to soften body and mind, as these commodities had lost almost all their pleasantness through habit, and as they had at the same time degenerated into true needs, being deprived of them became much more cruel than possessing them was sweet; and people were unhappy to lose them without being happy to have them." -Jean-Jacques Rousseau
yeah, the key is the lower usage. There’s a huge correlation between increased usage and decreased efficiency.
#52
"We have nothing to lose." - Martell
by Cablinasian on Apr 13, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Jack is having by far the best season of his career— and yes, its a better season than Bayless is having. One can easlily make the statistical case (and I would) that Jerryd is having a better year than Jack ever did in Portland, however.
But I need to feed my pet project of rationalizing the return of Jack.
Maybe I can cherry pick some good stats to support that.
"[S]ince men enjoyed very great leisure, they used it to pursue many kinds of commodities unknown to their fathers, and that was that first yoke they placed upon themselves without thinking about it, and the first source of evils the prepared for their descendants. For, besides continuing thus to soften body and mind, as these commodities had lost almost all their pleasantness through habit, and as they had at the same time degenerated into true needs, being deprived of them became much more cruel than possessing them was sweet; and people were unhappy to lose them without being happy to have them." -Jean-Jacques Rousseau
I think there is every reason to believe Jarrett has actually improved as a player and would help our team. However, a Jack-Rudy-Webster line would run into the same problems as we have now. I wouldn’t mind Jack-Bayless-Webster or something like that though—allowing Jerryd to play off ball and assume a larger role more gradually.
Of course, Toronto would never give him up and he wouldn’t give up a starting role their to play behind Dre here.
I don't know. Looks like Coach had a conversation with Bayless
And really messed him up. Seems like he drives less now and more plays on the perimater? He is really off his game and does not seem to know what he is supposed to do.
by LicketyBrindleDowntheMiddle on Apr 13, 2010 10:19 AM PDT reply actions
I disagree, that Nate had anything to do with Bayless' play recently.
He does drive less, but I think thats because teams are prepared for him now. Everytime he tried getting to the hoop against OKC, they cut off his path. You can tell from my signature that I like Bayless, but unfortunately, as of late he hasn’t been making his jump shots, and when he’s missing those, he becomes a one trick pony that is very easy to gaurd. That being said, if he could sharpen his ability passing off the drive, I think he could be an offensive threat once more.
It's Brandon Roy's world and we're only renting space We don’t like him—we’re only on his side so he doesn’t dunk on us in front of our co-workers, wives, girlfriends, mistresses and children.
-Correction It’s B Rex’s world and Brandon’s just keeping it warm until The Coming
by OhOhOden
by SandyTrailBlazer on Apr 13, 2010 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions
he said in an interview with Brian Smith that coaches are always telling him to drive.
Almost sounded like if he could choose he’d rather drive less and play in other ways.
I think Coach has had a huge influence-
on what has been a disappointing sophomore season. Ironically, Pritchard traded the player Coach developed for the player Coach has (perhaps) ruined. He’s young, so the jury is still out, but you’d be an over the top homer not to see that Bayless has taken a step backwards. His confidence, one must assume, is shaken, and I’m very concerned for his future. He can play. I just hope that he gets the chance to find his niche, perhaps like Jamal Crawford.
by damonrayhymer on Apr 15, 2010 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Too Bad We HAven't Given Patty Mills More PLaying Time
Begin Rant . . .
He is Jerryd Bayless — The Destroyer of Leads.
When Bayless had those few games earlier in the year, I thought he finally had arrived. Instead, he added one small facet to game and once other teams began to adjust, his game went away. He drives to the basket so insanely out of control, and still commits stupid, stupid fouls that he becomes a liability on the floor.
His shot — the one you claim he can create — is so erratic that can it truly be called a created shot? I’ve got as much confidence in him as I do a pitcher in the majors hitting a home run.
He was playing much better earlier in the year. He was playing better, more controlled offense, and his mistakes were fairly minor. In the playoffs he will be exposed as the player his is now — and that’s not a good thing. He is the weakest link on the team thats playing — he’s the one bench player I see NOT stepping it up and having success in the playoffs. He’s the guy I see racing to the hoop out of control and throwing the ball at the basket trying to draw a foul that’s never going to get called in the playoffs.
I wish we’d seen more about what Patty Mills can do. We’ve only seen him in garbage time, and he’s made his shots. I’d like to know if he’s a Bayless type of player who’s more consistent, and how well he plays defense. He might be a better choice for our future, but we’d never know.
…End Rant
by Anim8rguy on Apr 13, 2010 10:20 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Bayless is the anti-Roy
or maybe the anti-Miller. Both of those guys drive in a deceptive way — slowly, patiently, then using speed or veteran guile to find the scoring play. One of the reason Andre dishes so well off penetration is not just court vision, but also speed. Except on the few drives when Andre bulls his way to the rim, he’s moving at a speed where he has options.
Bayless doesn’t leave himself options when he drives. In my opinion, this is different than BBIQ or court vision. He’ll need those things certainly too, but right now when he drives he does it so strongly that he doesn’t leave himself a plan B.
I think Bayless has a strong future. Pros talk about the game slowing down as a player gets experience, and I think it has to slow down another notch for Bayless before he can find consistent success. Success for Bayless means balancing his rim-rocking drives with effective passing and anticipation of play to come. Right now, he needs to improve court vision and anticipation and all that, but he also needs to learn how to score while driving more like Andre — under control.
by greyhound9 on Apr 13, 2010 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Nice points...
I totally agree. Bayless has only one pace to his game: full boar (bore?). He could really learn from Miller’s ability to start-stop-start again. Bayless has a very quick first step and if he just learned to set it up a little better with a little misdirection, he’d get better opportunities (more open) at the rim or as a jump shot. Right now he is not getting the open layups like he was earlier in the season and last year. Teams have adjusted to him and anticipate his drive. And he always leaves his feet (unlike Miller) and gets caught in the air. If he jump stopped and pump faked he might get better opportunities and even more fouls. I really hope he watches game film of Miller this summer and picks up some of that craftiness. I am not sure Bayless will ever have the court vision Miller does but I think he can achieve if not exceed Miller’s scoring ability given his athleticism. That’s his real problem right now…He’s trying to out-jump or out-quick his opponents rather than out-think his opponents.
"You kill a mosquito with an axe. Nothing personal, but this is what I've got to do. You're in my way right now so I've got to get rid of you and I'll see you next year." -Monty Williams
Full bore.
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
I kind of like boar...just for the effect...
Just imagine some bizarre (yet terrifying) combination of a T. Rex and a warthog…
"You kill a mosquito with an axe. Nothing personal, but this is what I've got to do. You're in my way right now so I've got to get rid of you and I'll see you next year." -Monty Williams
very well put
Many guys in the NBA can out-quick one defender, but very few can out-quick a whole team. I think that’s what Jerryd tries to do too often. He could grow a lot as a playmaker if he learned to better use his speed (go, stop, go, fakes, etc).
I have been quite impressed at how he has started to take more of the role of a traditional PG, running the offense and looking to set guys up. I think a lot of what he has learned/is learning doesn’t show up on the stat books yet. I think that as he learns to get more comfortable in his role as PG on the team he will continue to develop and his aggressiveness, when harnessed, will become a tremendous asset.
You can say whatever you want to about him or about me, but my favorite Blazer to watch is #52.
by musicdaniel on Apr 15, 2010 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions
No the fanboys have started in on Juwan
regardless Bayless isn’t a PG
Kobe Tai > Kobe Bryant
by Sexual Tyrannosaurus on Apr 13, 2010 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Next time we vote
Can we vote to hate the people who hate Blazers players (who I love)? You can even be in the room then.
by einman77 on Apr 13, 2010 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
just a poor fit
I think i agree. Bayless is poor fit … with either starters or reserves. I think he might do well in another system (Golden State? Phoenix?) that can hide his weaknesses and play to his strengths. I don’t see that happening in the Roy/McMillan era. Therefore, I think the Blazers should package him up with others and get what they can. Not hating on BRex at all, just saying he doesn’t work for this bunch.
I remember hearing that a lot about Miller early in the season too!
by goobie1 on Apr 13, 2010 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
Rec
I’m not sure what to think about Bayless and his future with the team. I’m really undecided, although I think that we can all agree that he is nowhere near ready to take on a larger role at this time.
You make a great point though, in that Miller didn’t begin to excel until he meshed with the starters. So perhaps just forcing him to play with the first unit for a stretch of games would be enough to break him out.
But let me just finish by saying as of right now I have more confidence in Oden being a long term contributor to this team than Bayless.
by blazer_tk on Apr 13, 2010 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
rec
You can say whatever you want to about him or about me, but my favorite Blazer to watch is #52.
by musicdaniel on Apr 15, 2010 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Exactly. Bayless is a great fit waiting to happen.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
well written, atomic.
I think much of the bias against Bayless comes from fans’ apparent desire to have a ‘pure’ point guard. He gets judged through the lens of what we wish he was, and being put in a position as the only ballhandler on the court does nothing to help his cause.
He will be a good NBA player, here or somewhere else.
#52
"We have nothing to lose." - Martell
Blazer fans always need a whipping boy....
I was all for nominating Rudy a month or so ago after the trade but I’m split between Bayless and Rudy now. Rudy should be even more on the hot seat if he is going to get his opportunity to start for a couple games…
"You kill a mosquito with an axe. Nothing personal, but this is what I've got to do. You're in my way right now so I've got to get rid of you and I'll see you next year." -Monty Williams
yeah, Juwan has contributed way to little to this team....
"You kill a mosquito with an axe. Nothing personal, but this is what I've got to do. You're in my way right now so I've got to get rid of you and I'll see you next year." -Monty Williams
Sarcastic font in full effect!
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
It reads a little bit like the discussions on Blogabull if they should keep Ben Gordon last year ;-)
There was little common ground. Jerryd is a combo guard, and classic coaches don’t really know what to do with one. It might be just what we need next to Roy as long as he can defend point guards (which got better as the season progressed, most notably vs. Indiana), bring the ball up court (which seems to work well, his handles have improves or were already good), distribute the ball at times (still a weakness), and hit the spot-up shot off the ball (still a weakness). His “super strength” is driving to the rim for fouls or scoring. Unfortunately he doesn’t yet always have the vision and control to pass out of that if he runs into problems a la say Parker (his type) or Nash (not his type). The Blazers use that extensively in last second situations in the early quarters, but have gone somewhat away from it as the season progressed during the rest of the game forcing him more into a distributor and off the ball role. That’s where he needs to grow, but it’s also what makes him look bad at times.
Will he be here long term and grow into the starting role? I don’t know. Does he suck in a backup 1/2 role and need to be replaced asap? In my opinion absolutely not.
Dude's got value as a Combo Guard, absolutely, he's just not the PG-OTF
I loved him in the other day to drive the ball full length of the court at the end of the quarter with seconds remaining. He did it and made the shot and I think got fouled but the refs said “Hey, he’s a Blazer!” so they took that foul away.
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
I just don't see how you can know that yet.
I see way more reasons why Jerryd CAN be the PG-OTF than reasons why he CAN’T be. And Andre Miller has showed us this year how we don’t need a three point sniper for a PG, we can be very, very, very successful with another ball dominant G who gets to the rim and draws fouls. Making the right passes and right decisions is a huge reason why that works, and Jerryd still needs to learn that, but he CAN get there.
Saying he’ll never be the PG-OTF is just unfair at this point. He is very likely the PG-OTF. He’s just not the PG-OTPresent.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
With Miller, you get a post-up game
to go along with court vision and good passing, not to mention actually being better at getting to the rim than Bayless, despite no hops or speed. instead of 3pt prowess.
Whatever it is, Bayless needs to develop a second threat of some kind, be it incredible passing, long-range shooting, off-ball movement, whatever. As it is now, he only has one bankable asset, and that’s driving to the rim. Once that has been fully scouted and prepared for by the defense, he doesn’t have anything else in his arsenal. That’s why this season has been tough for him.
Stuckey, you still stuck on Bayless after his HORRIBLE showing in the RG tonight?
Oops :(
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
Not anymore, Bayless is garbage. We should trade him for a draft pick.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
by StuckeyDuck on Apr 15, 2010 12:35 AM PDT up reply actions
The kid needs to show progress is areas where he is not.
Defense, control on his drives (drive, draw, dish; rinse and repeat), court vision (last night, he had Batum alone in the corner several times and didn’t even look for him), his shooting is sporadic still. He has a role as a combo guard, but Rex is not the PG-OTF for this team.
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
He's only truly been given a chance since the trade.
And 30 games is too small a sample size to say he’s not showing improvement. Next year will show a lot, but pointing to him missing Batum in the corner as evidence to why he’ll never be the PG-OTF is just silly.
And he has shown a ton of improvement since he first took the court last season. Its just seems like people expect it to happen overnight now that Blake is gone and it just doesn’t work that way.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
PG-OTF means that it is so likely you won't draft for it again next year
Maybe if things turn out, we’re not sure, it’s not like we aren’t looking … that is the level Bayless is playing at, and that is the rate he is improving.
Playing time is a couple hours a week at most for a starter. Practice is a regular routine. Go strong or don’t go at all.
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
I wouldn't draft a PG.
Unless his name is John Wall and that is not an option. Jerryd is my man, unless a no-brainer upgrade comes along.
IMO, Jerryd is so likely our future starting PG that I wouldn’t draft one this year.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
by StuckeyDuck on Apr 16, 2010 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Nice FanPost, atomic
I agreed with your premise when you originally posted it in the GDT last night and I agree with it now. I think it’s enlightening that one of the best lineups available to us features a Miller-Bayless-Webster pairing on the perimeter (82games.com). That would seem to support your contention that Bayless flourishes when playing off the ball with a primary playmaker in the game as well. The Bayless/Rudy/Martell perimeter is statistically speaking one of our worst.
One of my biggest pet peeves is when people rag on Bayless for not being a pure point guard. Of course he isn’t a pure point guard; he wasn’t drafted to be a pure point guard. The ideal when we drafted Bayless is that he would thrive in an off-ball role while Roy did the majority of the creating on the offensive end and slide down to defend the ones too quick for Roy to check.
Bayless has been rocky for the last thirty or so games, and I’m the first to acknowledge that. But those who want to throw Bayless out with the bathwater aren’t seeing the forest for the trees IMO. In a team of jump shooters, he is elite in getting to the line. Better than Miller and Roy. Better than Melo and Kobe. On a par with LeBron and Wade. And in fits and spurts he has shown great potential defending out top. Yeah, he needs to cut down on his fouls, but he already has improved in that area since last year — from 4.5 per 36 to 4.2 per 3.6. He’s increased his ast% (18.2% to 21.6%) while drastically cutting down his TOV% by (19.3% to 13.7%). His assists per game are up. His shooting percentages are up across the board. And he’s 21 years old!
Commendable post and rec. Bayless is going to be a key cog on our championship teams.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
Bayless elite getting to the line
I don’t see Miller, Roy, Melo, Kobe, LeBron, or Wade get blocked, lose the ball out of bounds, or get stuck in the air with no where to go very often. Happens to Bayless all the time. Once he can learn to drive in control and not get suckered into charges and turnovers, then he will be elite at getting to the rim, which in my mind is more useful than elite at getting to the line.
I say that because Roy sometimes drives only to get contact, throwing up shots with no chance, and when he doesn’t get bailed out by a whistle he whines about it. Attack the rim, yes, but look for the bucket not the foul. Not winning ball, and we don’t need another player to adopt that style.
It's true that his TOV% isn't very good for somebody without a particularly high usage rate
but he’s made such tremendous strides in that area from his rookie year to this year, like I said in the first comment, that nothing leads me to believe he can’t continue improving. And he definitely gets his shot blocked a lot (compare 18% of close attempts to 15% for Miller and 11% for Roy) but he’s also really young. He’ll learn how to shield blockers off using his body and how to use the backboard to ward off shotblockers too.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Apr 13, 2010 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions
Thanks for the statistical bent
I don’t mean to sound like he isn’t improving or doesn’t have a place here. I think he’s made leaps since last year and I think Jerryd is right on pace to move into the starting role when Andre’s deal is up. Jerryd has the rim attack already, plus better D and 3-pt range even at this stage. Once he gets the court vision, which I think comes with time, he’ll be solid. He’s not a “dumb” player who can’t anticipate, I think he just doesn’t have the reps yet to be there.
Seems like fans, even cool-headed blazer fans, have a hard time waiting for talent to mature.
This is a HUGE point
That is one of my BRoy peeves: he drives looking for the foul instead of looking for the bucket. I HATE when players deliberately jump into a defensive player and throw the ball in the air in the general direction of the basket while yelling, expecting a whistle. It’s the offensive equivalent of a flop. It’s counter-productive. If they actually just focused on putting the ball in the hole in spite of whatever contact they might receive, two things would happen: the whistle would come more often as the foul would present itself more clearly, and the ball would go in the basket more often, meaning if you don’t get the whistle, you still score, and if you do get the whistle, it’s a potential 3pt play instead of two FTs.
TNT
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
Nice stats.
Your forgot Average Number of Leads Single-Handedly Blown. How much is that?
3.4 ANLSHB
but it gets a lot worse when you extrapolate over 36 minutes. :)
I’m not saying Jerryd is the answer or a finished product or should be playing lots more than he is or anything like that. Just that he has a lot of potential, and a few bad games doesn’t change that.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Apr 13, 2010 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions
The ideal when we drafted Bayless is that he would thrive in an off-ball role while Roy did the majority of the creating
Isn’t it ironic that Brandon and Jerryd have played so little together in the Blazer backcourt (without Blake and Miller also being on the floor) during the last 2 seasons
Either Bayless wasn’t drafted to be a PG, or Nate isn’t on the same page with the scouting dept re: what role Jerryd is being developed to fill on Portland’s roster
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I think that's the eventual role he is meant to play
and I definitely think that was the ratiocination for drafting him at the time, and the reason why many folks on this board were so excited about the selection. I’m not going to second-guess how the coaching staff brings him along at this point though; they’ve done a very good job IMHO of doling out minutes to Bayless as he’s shown that he’s capable of handling them.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Apr 13, 2010 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions
bayless at the 2 opposite miller works better than fernandez for me
bayless is a decent enough shooter, that he can be an option off of miller’s drives. would like to see bayless move more/better off the ball, especially using screens, or cutting back door. to me bayless game is naturally more of a 2, than a point guard. bayless could even bring the ball up the court and keep miller on the court more that way.
if he can gain a little more confidence, and slow down a bit, seeing him in a role similar to barbarosa of phoenix isn’t beyond belief.
this brings to mind one of my favorite pet peeves with mcmilan. miller is could easily play 6-7 more minuites each nite so that bayless could get court time with miller. really no reason to have bayless as the sole point on the court more that 2-4 minutes per half. really think the rotation needs to be tightened a lot, and each time miller is off the court movement just dies.
I think Barbosa is an excellent comparison
Bay has the potential to be an even better defender though.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Apr 13, 2010 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Parts of your theory mesh with my new favorite theory
that Martell’s time is completely wasted when he’s not in the game with someone who can pass to him when he cuts to the basket.
I was especially bummed last night when Rudy started with Andre, leaving no one at all on the bench to pass to Martell. Luckily Martell had a decent game and played long enough to be matched up with Andre for a while.
I’m still not sold on Bayless as a PG, but he’s still young.
The problem I am having is that Jerryd is making a lot of really bad decisions lately
And that the offense grinds to a complete halt when he is in the game.
Your logic seems to be that the rest of the team is somehow failing to compliment Bayless properly.
That is not a star player. A star player makes his team better. A star player doesn’t languish because everyone else on the team—those guys like Rudy and Martell who frequently make more plays, score more points, and make more happen than him—is somehow holding him back. A star player finds a way to make things work.
except that Bayless has been quite a bit better than Rudy or Martell this year, at least until you account for Martell’s several tremendous defensive games.
I disagree.
It’s probably not constructive to debate, but I have just plain not seen that. Rudy and Martell have been up and down to different degrees, while Bayless has been mostly down.
Mostly, what gets to me is the way Bayless can single-handedly destroy the team’s momentum. He comes out, does his stupid crossover dribble, and tries to play Michael Jordan while our lead evaporates. Neither Rudy nor Martell have made nearly as many costly, momentum-changing mistakes as Bayless, but both of them have on occasion made big plays when we need them, yet both of them get held ultra-accountable while Bayless is allowed to continue turning the ball over, clanging jump shots, and ignoring his teammates seemingly ad nauseum with no consequences.
In short, Rudy and Martell have made disappointingly low contributions, but have rarely been liabilities, while Bayless has been a liability AND a subpar contributor, yet seems to have carte blanche from the coaching staff to continue doing so.
I have no idea how long he will be allowed to get away with this, but I have the feeling that after the playoffs the coaching staff will finally see the light.
but at what point does lack of contribution become a liability?
In short, Rudy and Martell have made disappointingly low contributions, but have rarely been liabilities, while Bayless has been a liability AND a subpar contributor, yet seems to have carte blanche from the coaching staff to continue doing so.
The reason Jerryd is consistently forcing plays where he perhaps shouldn’t is arguably because Martell and Rudy are even worse at doing this, which highlights the need for an additional playmaker.
Except for the part where that's Bayless' job
Rudy and Martell are supposed to get set up by someone else, and Bayless is supposed to be a facilitator/playmaker. If we need an additional playmaker to set up plays for Bayless, then I think Bayless isn’t the right guy for our team.
The same faulty logic:
So Rudy and Martell cause Bayless to miss shots, to turn the ball over, and to not pass to them? So Bayless isn’t failing the team, the team is failing to make Bayless play well?
You need more than one player who can create on the floor at one time. The examples I cited above with Denver and San Antonio support this. Look at what happened to Houston with no shot creation this year: the onus fell to Ariza, who’s TS fell 6%.
I’m not saying anybody is “failing” anybody. The second unit simply doesn’t fit together. Martell and Rudy also aren’t playing up to their level largely because Jerryd isn’t the kind of PG that maximizes their talents. I concede this. As BoB notes below, we’ve been much more successful with a Jerry/Andre/Martell lineup on the floor, while Jerryd/Rudy/Martell has been terrible. I posit this is because the team is more balanced with two creators and one shooter than one creator and two shooters.
So then why is Bayless so worth keeping?
If he requires so much maintenance to be effective, why would we want him? Why not find someone who works better with the two guys we already have? Leads don’t evaporate while Martell and Rudy are on the floor. Leads evaporate while Bayless is on the floor. So who do we get rid of? What makes Bayless so special? I just don’t get it!
your statement that "leads evaporate when he's on the floor"
is confirmable by looking at +/- data, which actually doesn’t hate Bayless. It blames most of the leads evaporating on Howard being on the floor with the other subs.
I think you’re right to say that Miller/Rudy/Webster is a better crew than Bayless/Rudy/Webster. But I would posit Bayless is better than Blake in that situation. And if you get rid of Bayless, you still have to replace him with something better, which is not as simple as you might think. Bayless’s ability to get to the rim and potential make him substantially more valuable than Webster/Fernandez.
And it comes back to the same thing:
I don’t see the potential. Plain and simple. We disagree.
you can find the potential if you look, young grasshopper
just look at the good games in addition to the not so good games…
by blacknoiseNW on Apr 16, 2010 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions
He doesn't "require so much maintenance to be effective"
any more than any other NBA player that isn’t a star. He has to be put in situations that maximize his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. All Atomic is saying is that that hasn’t occurred.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Apr 13, 2010 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions
our team constantly puts players in positions they cannot succeed in
which is why a lot of our players have succeeded on other teams and not ours.
"There was a time when this blog was for intelligent BASKETBALL fans. It has unfortunately become O-Live 2…" ~Ilikeemall
"Did they really expect me to bow down to Jesus?!?" ~Sophia
"At first glance, I saw a fairly unremarkable penis." ~Sophia on Greg Oden
by Philthyanimal on Apr 13, 2010 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Who?
JJ? I guess. Other than that, I’m drawing a blank.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
And even JJ just straight-up got better, I think
it wasn’t an issue of him not being put in a position to succeed here. Who else? Channing is what he is and simply wasn’t a good fit with LMA or Travis in the frontcourt. Sergio couldn’t wrest minutes from Udrih in Sactown, got dealt to New York, and hasn’t exactly been setting the world alight there. Blake and Travis have struggled in Los Angeles.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
by BlazersOrBust on Apr 13, 2010 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions
for all of Howard's faults, he ain't no Channing, and that's a good thing
Channing is a fun player to root for – but Portland needs someone to apply the forearm shiver, make a pass from the high post once in a while, and shoot inside of 30’ – a skill set that is different – and a better fit – than Channing’s….
by blacknoiseNW on Apr 16, 2010 11:45 PM PDT up reply actions
last years bench
travis was the only offensive player that could create for himself. i thought our bench was more effective last year with lesser players.
Sergio, Rudy, Travis, Frye, Greg
that lineup had 2 players that everyone wanted off the team yet only had 1 guy who could create for himself.
"There was a time when this blog was for intelligent BASKETBALL fans. It has unfortunately become O-Live 2…" ~Ilikeemall
"Did they really expect me to bow down to Jesus?!?" ~Sophia
"At first glance, I saw a fairly unremarkable penis." ~Sophia on Greg Oden
by Philthyanimal on Apr 13, 2010 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah, this is interesting to note
Two points
1) Sergio arguably could create shots for other players but not himself, with his dribbling and creative passing. His precise passing and the uptempo game he facilitated aided Rudy and also created more points for Outlaw.
2) Frye played very few minutes (just 12 a game in 61 games). Aldridge was primarily spelled by Outlaw at the PF. I remember when Aldridge was out of the game, the lineup was typically something like Blake-Fernandez-Roy-Outlaw-Oden.
Don't see it creating more for Outlaw
He almost never took assists aside from the kickout from Roy (when they played together).
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
here you go
Jerryd’s stats are significantly better, as he scores at about the same efficiency level but with 7 pts higher useage. His assist rate is just as good as Rudy’s, and he turns the ball over less.
Martell has not been a particularly good offensive player, but adjusted plus minus and the naked eye confirm his value on the defensive end.
I dunno
those stat lines don’t show me a great leg-up for Bayless.
Actually, according to that data Bayless turns the ball over just as much as Rudy, and more on the per-36-minute stats.
Rudy gets more steals, shoots 3s better, rebounds more, and trails in assists by .3 of a point, not bad considering he doesn’t run the offense like Bayless does.
Martell averages more points, fewer turnovers, more blocks, more rebounds, shoots 3s better and lags by only hundredths on field goal percentage.
I’m not saying I’m a stats guy, but I remain unconvinced.
I mean, they each have their plusses and minuses, Bayless does not look significantly better to me overall.
And I have seen both Rudy and Martell come through in the clutch, and beyond those two big games, I’m just not seeing that from Bayless.
We can disagree, I don’t mind, I just don’t understand why people see so much in him.
I think they are close right now
my tiebreaker would be that Jerryd is a full three years younger than Rudy, and Martell has already been in the league for five years. That means he’d be the more likely of the three to improve.
Okay... different story
He was saying Bayless has played clearly better this year. That is what I was calling untrue.
from those numbers I don't know how you could conclude Jerryd is better
The only real advantage for Jerryd is usage.
Rudy, by those numbers is the more efficient scorer, better rebounder and defender.
More correct might be that Jerryd has improved (e.g. up 6 points in PER to 14.5 to become an average player, and better pretty much better across the board in per game as well as total numbers) while Rudy has regressed a little also in most categories.
Jerryd's PER has been falling pretty quickly since the trade
I think he was up around 16-17 before taking on a consistent role at pg. I can’t find anywhere that says his PER since the trade, but I am willing to bet it is in the 11-13 range playing a pg role.
Where's Rudolfo?
you'd lose that bet
14.45. He has been floating between 30-35th best pg by PER.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Apr 14, 2010 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Link?
I found this comment from ULC on March 2, Bayless had a PER of 15.6 at that time. How does Bayless’s PER drop from 15.6 to 14.5 in the last month and a half without Bayless averaging a PER below 14.5? Consider this, through March 2nd, he played 981 minutes and had a PER of 15.6. Since that point, he has played 303 minutes and managed to drop his overall PER for the entire season a full point. I would think that puts him right around 12 in March and April, but I cant find any sites that breakdown PER by month so I could be wrong.
Where's Rudolfo?
PER is garbage. What do your eyes tell you?
Here’s what I see:
1. The guy can get to the rack — and that is an enormously valuable Playoff Basketball Skill. He’s an AND ONE monster…
2. He needs to work on finishing and not always needing to get bailed out by a whistle.
3. His catch-and-shoot perimeter shot is decent, if unspectacular.
4. He plays good defense. He is learning what he can and can’t get away with with respect to the handchecking rules.
5. He’s a good team player. His passes are not spectacular, but he’s a functional drive and dish guy and is progressing.
6. The dude still isn’t old enough to be a 4-year-of-college rookie yet, so people need to remember that and be patient. We’re still not quite sure what he will ultimately be yet.
7. He is a point guard, not a shooting guard.
8. He REALLY needs to work at getting his feet behind the 3 point line. I can’t start to guess how many long 2s he hit this year, with one foot on the line. A TON.
9. He’s never gonna be the huge perimeter bomber. He will probably be a functional catch-and-shoot hit the open 3 sort of guy, which works okay if he plays within himself.
10. Bayless next to Roy looks fine. Bayless next to Rudy is a mess.
I’d put him on the B- or Straight-B borderline for this season. He has made progress. He needs to make more progress. I’m not sure he’s the PG of the future, but he’s definitely not an NBA washout.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Apr 16, 2010 7:08 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
tsk, tsk
he isn’t old enough to be a 3rd-year college player….
by blacknoiseNW on Apr 16, 2010 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions
agree
with the first sentence at least…I think stat people assume it says it all…simple observation gives you the best information, by a long shot.
I would comment on the rest of your points (all really good observations).
He is only a “B” player if you grade on the curve for raw talent/lack of maturity…straight up he’s a C-, at best.
2. Bayless is a free-lance type player with tons of aggression…A bull in Nate’s corral…He can’t come in and be a floor general, do, in part, to his limited court awarness and rough ball handling skills..This IMO is what keeps him from emerging into a more solid all around player
3. Bayless is young and has enough talent to be a above average NBA player. Portland may not be able to wait for him to mature if they are not willing to let him “role play” in the meantime. ( I think he has good basketball instincts, but has not developed them into good BBIQ (so to speak) This is sometimes just a maturing process and a refinement of fundamentals.
He’s a viable NBA player but not a floor general. So his fit in Portland will probably come down to how they choose to use him. Right now he is our backup point guard…an extension of the coach out on the floor? It’s a reach, folks, but not entirely impossible.
Bayless next to Roy looks fine.
When have you seen the two of them on the floor when Brandon was not playing the 3? Not often. To me, this speaks volumes that the Blazers don’t consider Bayless-Roy to be their “starting backcourt of the future”
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Ra Ra RA RA ra... Just trade him for Conley NOW.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
Head Czar of Amerika <--- Mortimer said so so there!!!
help me out here...
Conley is producing less despite being in his third NBA season playing heavy minutes for a bad team, and having plenty of weapons on the floor to pass to (Mayo, Gay, Randolph M. Gasol). Why would we want him?
your take.. one is on a great team yet still kinda just bobs on the surface, and the other who you say is ...
on a bad team and putting up comperable numbers… I think you need more than my help. but I’m sure you’re not the only one feeling this way.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
Head Czar of Amerika <--- Mortimer said so so there!!!
Excellent analysis
Everything you said makes perfect sense and jives intuitively for me. Plus, you used statistics to back up your conclusions.
My take on Bayless: He can drive right and will develop and reliable jump shot eventually. These tools will serve him well in his NBA career, but he isn’t ready to fill the role expected of him right now. Coach McMillan will need to shorten the leash, but without Roy in the lineup it will be impossible so we are stuck with Bayless, which isn’t such a bad thing for a young player on a young team. He’s got some mettle, so I expect he’ll do some good things for us come playoff time. The only question is how many bad things will he do to offset the good, and what will the overall effect be. Hopefully he can avoid turnovers and defensive lapses, two things that he is physically capable of doing but mentally hasn’t quite gained the composure.
jump shot
I think Monty needs to work with Jerryd this summer. Intensive work on his jump shot. That, plus experience, is what he needs most. His drives would be more effective if defenders had to respect the jump shot like they respect Rudy’s and Martell’s jumper.
I also think Bayless is a pretty good (and improving) defender. He certainly has the tools to defend point guards – he has speed, size and strength.
Besides working with Monty over the summer, I’d give him a bucket load of Terry Porter tapes – circa 88-95. He could do worse than modeling his game on TP’s.
No, no, no.
Andre is proof that a jump shot isn’t the end all be all. A good jumper is a great weapon, but the thing he needs more is game management training. He needs film sessions. He needs to practice on making the right decisions fast. He needs to learn some crafty tricks from watching Andre. He needs to develop strong chemistry with Roy, Aldridge, and Oden. He needs to know the playbook inside and out (all two plays that Nate runs). He needs to develop Nate’s trust in him.
A consistent jump shot is a great thing, but that isn’t what is holding him back so far. It is his decision making.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
by StuckeyDuck on Apr 14, 2010 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
rec and agreed!
quicker and better decisions. If he’s thinking more clearly out on the court, his shots will fall. I think he misses some shots because he’s second-guessing if that’s the right play. I don’t know if anyone works as hard at his shooting as Bayless. He’ll get the shots to fall, he just needs to be in the right place mentally so he can be sure of what he’s doing.
You can say whatever you want to about him or about me, but my favorite Blazer to watch is #52.
by musicdaniel on Apr 15, 2010 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions
unfortunately the best fit
for bayless is in the starting lineup, but he won’t find himself in that position any time soon. if he were to start in the same backcourt as roy and with aldridge on the floor, you would see his drives become infinitely more successful and he could share the point duties. He would be the unaccounted for scorer rather than being forced to be the play maker. That would also be a hyper athletic backcourt
If he can steadily improve over next season, I think that this may become a reality. He would also supply what Roy lacks, which is a turbo motor and enthusiasm. That said I think he is missing Dante in that second unit also. If it could be said he had chemistry with anyone in the second unit ,it was Dante and the pick and pop.
I agree with this a bit.
Jerryd Bayless + 4 years NBA experience + a starting role with this team = PG position solved. The biggest issue is keeping him happy, keeping him working hard, and convincing him that he has an opportunity to be the starter if he can just hold on until Andre is gone.
Its gonna be very disappointing if Jerryd goes looking for greener pastures because he is to impatient to wait for Dre to leave a vacant spot open. He should be a long term part of this team, but in order to make that happen I think Nate needs to make an effort to increase his role in the short term as well (next season).
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
Good stuff to think about
Next season, IMO, will be the key evaluation season for Bayless in terms of trying to determine if he’ll be a long-term part of the team.
In my mind, it all comes back to a fundamental question that has been discussed at length here at BE (and on other discussion boards) – what does the ‘perfect’ starting PG for the Blazers look like? Once that question is answered, then evaluation of Bayless, or anyone else, can be attempted properly.
For example, IMO, Andre Miller is not the long term solution at PG. And not just because of his age. Even if Miller were 10 years younger, I would say that he would not be the long term solution at PG. He fills some of the requirements of what the Blazers need long term at PG, but his inability to play off the ball (how many times have we seen the offense create an open 3 pointer for him but he fails to take it because he’s not a 3-P shooter?) is a huge liability simply because Roy, the key offensive player, needs to create and have the ball in his hands.
Bayless seems to have the skill set that potentially could make him a good (if not great) complement to Roy in the starting lineup. He’s better than Miller at shooting off of the pass (though he still needs work in this area), he can create his own shot (although I agree with the criticism of others in the thread about him being out of control at times when attacking the hoop), he’s showing signs of the ability to drive and dish, and he also has shown signs of having defensive skills (especially the speed to stay with quicker PGs in the halfcourt). That being said, if he doesn’t improve in all these areas, Bayless will be nothing more than just ‘potentially’ being the long term solution at PG.
I clearly haven’t given up on the idea of Bayless being the future starting PG of the Blazers. But time is drawing shorter. He needs to show measurable improvement in all facets of his game next year. Miller will still be around to start next year, but beyond that…..
If Bayless hasn’t resolved my doubts about his ability to continue developing by next January, then I will be on the bandwagon to trade him. But I still see enough to give him at least that long.
"It's Our Time":http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O99POVJfglY
Conclusion: conditions for Bayless can not (or should not) stay the same
. Agree, and nor should it stay the same for the rest of the team. Trade him. He’s not a point guard no matter how you slice it – pure/unpure/good/hybrid.
Things I love about Bayless:
Very hard worker
Nice guy
Good at getting to the rim
Physical defense
Great warrior mentality
Things I do not love about Bayless:
Flat, unnatural jumper.
Doesn’t dictate offensive tempo.
Often gets lost on his defensive assignment during switches.
Not a creative passer.
Lacks court vision.
Gets blocked too often while going at the bucket.
Seems very mechanical and predictable while trying to quarterback the team.
I really thought signing ALM would have benefited Bayless. But, for reasons unknown to me (perhaps Andre’s fault for not reaching out to the youngster?) I see the same Bayless now as I did in Summer League.
As you may argue that the bench roster is not good for him, it’s just as easy to counter with the theory that he only weakens our bench. There are kids out there that put in half the work that JB does and are still more talented at that position.
Great guy, but not the future PG of this franchise, IMHO.
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Apr 13, 2010 1:40 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Seeing Miller 'up close'
he’s not a teacher or mentor. Not like Howard. I think that Miller likes his teammates, but he doesn’t have the drive to train or develop younger players. Not how he’s wired.
"It's Our Time":http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O99POVJfglY
but Jerryd is supposedly working out with Billups during the offseason
and if there’s anyone who can teach Bayless how to make the transition, it’s Chancey
I’d rather see Portland pursue a veteran backup PG, someone in the 28-32 year old range who has routinely been to the playoffs would be ideal. Not too many of those guys out there
“developing young PGs” is not anywhere near a strength of this organization, not before or during Nate’s tenure. So it’s better to acquire them via trade, like Blake and Miller were
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I don't think you're doing Bayless any favors here.
The argument seems to conclude that Bayless is only, and ONLY, effective with great playmakers and scorers around him.
I’d like to see the splits between pre and post Blake trade. The point guard position requires a level of playmaking ability that Bayless hasn’t quite shown he possesses. Just like a center needs to rebound and play interior defense. What good is a PG who can’t shoot or make plays on the court.
"I'm at the thingamajig talking the yakety-yak" - Kenny Smith
I think this is fair
The point guard position requires a level of playmaking ability that Bayless hasn’t quite shown he possesses.
It is definitely an open question as to whether Bayless is an NBA point guard. However, I think this is a bit of a strawman:
The argument seems to conclude that Bayless is only, and ONLY, effective with great playmakers and scorers around him.
Beyond not having “great” playmakers or scorers, the lineup of Bayless/Fernandez/Webster is possibly the worst playmaking 1-2-3 combination regularly played by a Western Conference contender (outside the Lakers who are extraordinarily dependent on Kobe and their bigs). Now part of this is the fact that Bayless himself is more or less an average playmaker, but asking an average guy to do all the shot creation puts him in over his head. I would venture to guess that if you put Lawson or Hill in with Martell and Rudy, our offense would struggle the same way. Maybe Chris Paul could make it look good, but we have to be realistic. It’s my opinion that Bayless looks bad because he’s forced to do more of the playmaking work than his abilities warrant—he’s an average and improving player who’s made to look awful by the situation he’s in.
This is speculation.
I would venture to guess that if you put Lawson or Hill in with Martell and Rudy, our offense would struggle the same way.
I can similarly say put Lawson and Hill with Martell and Rudy, our offense would have better spacing, movement, and more open shots. In fact, I can just as easily point the finger at Bayless as the culprit of the struggles of Rudy and Martell off the bench. The point guard carries more responsibility than any other position. If the de facto leader of the court struggles with passing, ball screens, and shooting, then what chance do the rest of the players have?
The bottom line is that Bayless has not been good as the point guard. In fact, he’s not even that good as an off guard due to his shooting deficiencies and his inability to finish at the rim.
Putting Bayless with Roy or Miller only hurts the team because it forces Roy to play point guard which he is not, and forces Miller to guard shooting guards. What dependable skill can the Blazers rely on Bayless to deliver?
"I'm at the thingamajig talking the yakety-yak" - Kenny Smith
I think the root of our disagreement
is that you see Bayless struggling in certain situations off the bench, and attribute this to a lack of point guard skills, then attribute the rest of the bench’s poor performance to Bayless’s struggling. I totally understand this. I am not putting a ton of stock in observable point guard skills, because I think the reason he optically fails to measure up to Lawson and Hill is because Bayless (USG 25) is forced to shoulder much more of the load than Lawson (USG 19) or Hill. I think if placed in a situation where he could shoot more selectively and pass to better scorers, he would do better. If those guys had to shoot more, their efficiency would likewise decline.
Doesn't pass the smell test.
A PG job is to run the team, period.
Its no acident the whole second unit started playing poorly when Bayless became the primary backup PG once Blake left.
Thats on Bayless, not the other way around.
except your quibble doesn't ripple with this team
This team has been getting good looks – and hasn’t been hitting them consistently…
by blacknoiseNW on Apr 16, 2010 11:58 PM PDT up reply actions
as long as he's steady
I used to complain about “non-offensive” Blazer backup PGs like Danny Young and Michael Holton, back in the day. Those guys seemed like a waste of time because they didn’t (personally) generate any offense while they were on the court. But a good backup PG will keep the vehicle out of the ditch while the starter is getting a blow, and expecting much more than that from them is wishful thinking. Besides, if your backup PG is much better than a placeholder, chances are that he should have aspirations of starting elsewhere and leading his own ballclub
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Blazers got rid of Danny Young after a couple years.
Brought in Ainge to carry the ball handling duties along with a young Robert Pack.
"I'm at the thingamajig talking the yakety-yak" - Kenny Smith
Actually
Enis Whatley replaced Young, Ainge replaced Petro
and Pack was a complete surprise, 2nd round choice who made a veteran team in training camp, best Blazer rags-to-riches story since Kersey
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/1992.html
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I think Rex next to Roy looks pretty good.
I think Rex next to Rudy is a catastophe.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Apr 13, 2010 4:32 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I take umbrage with your headline
I mean, the JB experiment probably hasn’t finished, but it’s certainly begun.
UMBRAGE!
by samuelleejackson on Apr 13, 2010 4:59 PM PDT reply actions
this made me laugh
To make matters worse, Bayless is not only saddled with handling all the duties associated with handling the ball and initiating the offense, he is also the only perimeter bench player who can get his own shot.
That’s pretty much the job description of a point guard … you say it as if he’s been unfairly tasked with actually setting up the offense and running a team. Guy’s Jerryd’s size who can’t run an offense or setup teammates are called short shooting guards for a reason.
the heart of the anti-bayless fallacy, expressed perfectly in a single post
is the role of offensive sets to set up specific players – not the point guard….
It is precisely when a player begins to use his speed and strength to create his own shot and draw defenders that he is dynamically “setting up” a teammate….
Teammates that recognize defensive breakdowns and move without the ball to an open space (inside or out) get the ball from Bayless – just as they do from Miller. Those teammates just don’t happen to do this often enough because they are continually running sets…..
by blacknoiseNW on Apr 17, 2010 12:01 AM PDT up reply actions
The only reason I don't Boo Bayless is because he is wearing a Blazer Uniform
Sometimes I wonder when watching Bayless on the court if he is really trying to help the opposing team win….
Draft Cole Aldrich
$8?
They were $8.75 at Safeco yesterday. What a bargain.
Bring back Camby. Please.
by The Cactus Leaguer on Apr 13, 2010 5:52 PM PDT reply actions
This will be become the equivalent of last summer's Outlaw debate.
Nearly everyone likes Bayless the person and admires his work ethic. Statistics will be sliced and diced to prove he is a future superstar. He’s only 21. He just needs another year, or two, to develop. He will be the next Jermaine O’Neal if we trade him. etc. etc. etc.
But most importantly (and if fact, all that really matters), we don’t need a “true PG” starting with Roy.
Well, I bought into that last one too when we drafted Bayless. I hoped that Roy could eventually be our half-court (PG) play-maker and Bayless our long-term “PG”. That isn’t going to happen. Other playoff quality teams have figured out the best way to defend Brandon is to double team him from the opening whistle to the closing buzzer. Miller has proved that it is essential to have a “true PG” beside Roy that can run our offense, and it will be even more true in the future with Oden.
Roy, Miller, LMA, Camby, Oden, Batum, a good backup PG, and a high-quality backup 2/3 next year.
The Bayless “experiment” hasn’t begun – it’s over.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Apr 13, 2010 6:01 PM PDT reply actions
I gotta agree
I was on the record that Bayless could be "the next Terry Porter’ to play alongside Roy like TP was once Clyde’s sidekick. But someting happened on the way to the classic backcourt replay. Jerryd hasn’t developed a reliable outside shot. After reading Quick’s 40th anniversary piece on Porter this weak, we learned that Geoff Petrie worked with #30 for 3 straight summers to the point where Terry became an outlet shooter that Drexler could rely on. I will never fault Byless’ work ethic or perseverence, but when the rubber hits the road, Jerryd’s jumpers are not hitting the net.
Roy has played well with Blake as his PG. Now Brandon and Andre have won 50 games (even though Roy has had back and hamstring problems that have hindered his game) It’s not like there’s only "one kind of PG’ that #7 needs to have on the floor—he just needs a guard who can do one of 2 things: shoot the ball or post up smaller PGs. Bayless can do neither and it doesn’t look like Nate has been given any reason to stick Jerryd out on the floor as Brandon’s sole running mate at guard for any significant amount of time during the last 2 seasons
Unless Jerryd shows us a whole lot more game in the playoffs than he’s shown in the last month, I wouldn’t hesitate to deal him this summer. In fact, I wouldn’t mind seeing what Travis Deiner can do for 5 minutes a half…at least we know he can stick the J when he’s left open
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
compare the "minutes played" column with Jerryd
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bayleje01.html
Porter played almost as many minutes during his rookie year as Bayless has, this year
During Porter’s next 2 seasons, he played 2714 and 2991 minutes. Can you project Bayless playing anywhere close to those minutes in Portland as long as Roy, Miller and Rudy are healthy?
All of the PER stats in the world can’t change the facts: Bayless came late to the party re: the Blazer’s retooling schedule. Fair or not, he has not gotten the opportunity to play 25-30 mpg and make mistakes (and learn from them) at the NBA level. Nate has not chosen to play Bayless at the 1 and Roy at the 2 for any extended amount of time.
Next year, Miller will be doing what he’s been doing this year. Rudy will probably be back, whether he wants to be or not is beside the point. So, Uunless Brandon gets his minutes cut back, Bayless is going to get the leftovers and continue to strugle with his consistency—which isn’t his fault it’s just the way it is.
Meawhile, what the team needs more than a developing PG is a steady-hand veteran to come off the bench for 10-15 mpg and make sure the reserves remain reasonably productive so Roy and Miller don’t have to be rushed back into the game. Is Bayless the best choice for this role? Is he really Portland’s future PG? I’m not nearly as high on this probability as I was just 2 monhs ago, and the team can’t afford to wait around to find out that the Bayless “experiment” hasn’t worked out quite as well as they hoped it would.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
well that leaves us in something of a catch 22
If our requirement for a “steady hand” at the backup PG position precludes us from developing a point guard of the future, how are we going to replace Andre? To get a player of Dre’s caliber that was ready to contribute from the get-go for nothing more than a modest amount cash was very serendipitous, and is not something we can count on to replace him (+ we won’t have any cap space and will only have the MLE to spend).
Furthermore, if we can’t let Jerryd do any teething on the second unit now, there’s no chance that we’ll be letting someone break in to the NBA in two years, so it’ll have to be an experienced and quality NBA player, something you typically pay a premium for. Getting Devin Harris or one of the Minny PGs after the Nets or Wolves draft John Wall? Possible, but I wouldn’t count on it. Experienced, quality NBA point guards are a valuable commodity, and teams will be loathe to part with them. I see no reason we can’t just keep Jerryd and hope he gets better, even if we have to have him play off-guard or sit on the bench to make it tenable.
you trade for one
I’ve been accused of defeatist thinkng for this suggestion in the past, but if you look at the Blazer’s track record of developing PGs for the past 20 years, it’s been abysmal. At some point, you’ve gotta stop hoping that one of these kids will break through and draft other positions, build up roster depth and then trade from that excess to acquire a veteran PG in a year or two. The two most-effective Blazer PGs in the last 5 years (Blake, Miller) were added to the roster after another team had already developed them. That’s my answer. Or, the Blazers can continue doing the same thing they’ve been doing for the last 20 years and expect a different result?
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
yeah hopefully
I guess your ideal scenario would be we basically take on either an overpaid but productive PG in a salary dump, or take on a bad salary in exchange for getting a good PG? If we are giving up on Jerryd, other teams are going to see him as a suspect prospect, given that we went out of our way to get him in hopes that he would be our guy. I think Rudy’s value has taken a big hit this year, and you have been pretty vocal about the idea that PA sees him as untouchable. Martell is a good player with an OK contract, but he’s really pretty underwhelming as a trade chip—not going to fetch you much. So what we’re counting on is giving up Joel’s EC next year and hoping to take on a bad contract in exchange for a PG. Possible, but that can be a tough road.
It's always hard to read the other GM
For example, there were some that suggested that Blake and Outlaw should be dealt for Camby long before the deal was announced, but I dismissed because “why would the Clippers even consider doing that?”
Uhh…because Donald Sterling is cheap?
Webster, Bayless and Rudy have diminished as assets to our way of thinking, but there may be a coach or GM out there who really like them (individually, or as a set) for any number of reasons. They’ve played on 50 win teams, that tends to make them look shinier than similar players with better stats who have played more minutes on losing teams) They’re young. They have nice contracts. They have certain skills that fit well in the situations of the team who is interested—who knows? Trades are made or not made based on any number of factors, and they don’t always “make sense” from a pure talent perspective.
I want to see how the kids do next week before making a final judgment. Performances (good or bad) during playoff pressure should be “weighted” more heavily than regular season stats, etc. If they play well, their stock will soar, both in the eyes of Bedgers (who will be loathe to trade them!) and in the minds of rival scouts and GMs. If they do poorly, your worst-case scenario could ring true. But it only takes one GM who sees potential in one of your players to make a deal
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
There's probably at least one GM that see's Bayless, Webster, or Rudy
as many fans see them. i.e they could thrive on a faster paced team with more (or even starting) playing time. I think Webster and particularly Rudy (if he doesn’t insist on returning to Europe, which I suspect he probably will) still have significant trade value. We won’t have to pay a team to get rid of any of them, as we did with Sergio last summer.
I’m sure we can acquire a backup PG this summer that will improve the team next year compared to Bayless. We could probably do that with the MLE alone and trade no one if we wanted to go that route. It may (or may not) take longer to acquire a future starting PG to replace Miller, but we have a couple of years plus other assets (Joel’s EC if we can re-sign Camby, Miller’s EC after next year, Cunningham, Claver, Freeland, future draft picks) in addition to Bayless, Webster and Rudy (if he’s still here) to package in that quest. A future Miller replacement is not our highest priority right now.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Apr 14, 2010 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions
watching our 2nd unit has really made me miss troutlaw
Travis could consistently create for himself. He had his faults, but it was awesome having a guy like that off the bench.
by jervil on Apr 13, 2010 8:12 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I'm a Bayless guy
Always have been, but watching him struggle the way he has in recent months is tough. He has stopped drawing fouls almost completely in recent games and simply looks out of control on drives either crashing out of bounds or forcing a mid-air pass. I think he has the ability to become a productive player in the NBA, I don’t pretend to know whether this will be off the bench or as a starter, as a pg or sg, in Portland or elsewhere.
At present I’m more sold on the chances of starting Rudy, Brandon and Nic with each taking some responsibility initiating the offense than in Bayless starting here. In any case I think Dre is the starter for the next two years by which time alot of changes are sure to have occurred.
Without over simplifying it, I think Batum and Rudy are guys who Paul Allen will want to hold on to while Bayless is someone who is KP’s guy. That counts for something
Off-Topic, but....
With the disclaimer of being injury prone and foul prone……regardless…..pretty much every advanced stat I come across loves it some Greg Oden. I mean even the ones you would really expect.
^
Someone posted a link that said Howard kills us when hes on the floor.
http://basketballvalue.com/teamplayers.php?year=2009-2010&team=POR
I like it. Rec. Well thought out.
Jerryd just has too many physical tools to give up on him yet. We need to see him play with Roy before we make a judgement on his future.
"What people need to know is that those pictures were taken a year and a half ago, and I've grown since then." - Greg Oden
Jerryd has had a pretty decent chance to showcase himself as a point guard since the trade
and he has failed to take advantage of it. Avoiding stats, and just watching the guy try to run the team is evidence enough for me. He has shown very little ability to react to a defense and make good decisions. Its like he decides whether he is going to drive with the intention of passing or shooting before he even gets a screen. I hate to be hard on the kid, and I don’t think it is time to give up on him. He needs work if he wants to be anything close to a pg, lots of work.
His turnovers have been legitimately awful, especially in April, where he is averaging over 4 per 36 minutes. 10 assists and 10 turnovers in the last 6 games is not getting it done. I don’t want to hear this Jerryd is suffering because of Rudy and Martell bullhonkey. In March and April, Bayless has 40 assists and 29 tunovers, Rudy has 34 assists and 7 turnovers. Jerryd is the real turnover machine, not Rudy.
The thing that made Jerryd valuable and skyrocketed certain stats that are constantly used to defend him was his ability to draw fouls. Unsurprisingly, when he takes on responsibilities that a normal pg would have, his free throws attempted plummeted. He was averaging around 8FTA per 36 before the trade, In April and March, barely 4FTA per 36. He has attempted 3 freethrows in April. To his credit, he is shooting the 3 ball at a much better percentage, but he is only good for a made 3 every other game or so.
The Jerryd Bayless experiment began the day Blake was traded and he became the #2pg. So far, I think it has been unsuccessful. This is just round 1 though, next season is round 2, we’ll see….
Where's Rudolfo?
Jerryd is the PERFECT fit, just a little green.
For weeks at the beginning of the season, Blazer fans all over were crying over what a terrible fit Andre Miler was. He needed the ball in his hands (“but Roy needs the ball in HIS hands!”). He didn’t have a great outside shot (“but Roy needs guys to spread the floor!”). He wasn’t an exceptional defender (“but, but, but Nate NEEDS strong defenders!”). Meanwhile I was just smiling. I loved the signing and I was wondering why I couldn’t buy an Andre Miler jersey at the team store. We finally had a PG who could actually ATTACK a defense. Teams would be forced to actually guard Andre Miller, not just “close out” the way they always could with Blake. He drove to relentlessly to the hoop and nearly always made the right decision when he got there. And I LOVED the way he could get to the line. In addition to being a scoring threat himself, he was a passer. He got the ball into Greg. He found LaMarcus where he wanted it. I kept thinking, as soon as Nate figures this thing out, we’re gonna be tough to beat. And look who was right . . . me. (I know there were other Miller believers out there, but we were far from the majority)
One of the things that I really loved about the signing when it happened was what it could mean for Jerryd. Someone above referred to Bayless as the “anti-Miller” and I couldn’t disagree more. Bayless takes the ball to the rack, just like Miller does. He gets to the line like Miller. He doesn’t rely on outside shooting, and neither does Miller. I think it was Canzano who described Miller on the day he was signed as “A point guard that takes the ball to the rack relentlessly and finishes well at the rim. He doesn’t have a great outside shot, but he can knock down the mid range shot enough to make you guard him. He has an attitude on the court that is confident, bordering on cocky.” If you tuned in late and didn’t know who he was talking about, that description could be mistaken for Bayless in a heart beat. The guys possess the identical skill set down to the flat jumper. And Miller has taken those skills and turned in a remarkable NBA career. Not only has his career been impressive, but he has clearly become the PERFECT point guard for our team. The only thing that separates the two right now is experience. Bayless does make bonehead plays (actually, Miller does too). He telegraphs passes. He sometimes shoots deep shots that he shouldn’t (actually, Miller does that as well). Quite honestly, Jerryd Bayless plays the way you’d expect a 2nd year PG with one year of college experience would play. He has flashes, but he has long cold stretches where he can’t seem to do anything right.
People will point to BBIQ, but I think that is the most baloney argument in the world. BBIQ is not something that you are born with, it is coached into you. Jerryd needs coaching. He needs mentoring. His development needs to be a priority for this team (and that starts with being a priority for Nate). It is obvious to anyone who follows this team closely that Jerryd desperately wants to get better. He tries to do exactly as the coaching staff says. He is a workaholic. He has all the physical tools, as well as the work ethic to realize his potential. HE WILL GET THERE and when he does, it will be the best thing in the world for this franchise.
Miller didn’t turn into the right PG for us until Nate stopped trying to mold him into something he isn’t and instead figured out how to make him fit with what we have. The same needs to happen with Jerryd. In just a year, maybe two, Andre Miller will be facing retirement and our basketball team will be stepping into the prime of their championship window. If Jerryd continues to develop, if he continues to work on his chemistry with Roy, LaMarcus, Greg, Nic, and Martell, and if he picks up some tricks and tips from Andre Miller, Nate may have the luxury of handing the keys to the car over to a 22/23 year old Andre Miler 2.0. I can’t imagine a more seamless transition to the next era then to have a mature Bayless pick up right where Andre left off.
This needs to be the plan and this plan needs to be expressed to Jerryd. He needs to remain happy in Portland. He needs to continue to back-up Dre as long as necessary. He needs to see that sooner than he can comprehend he’ll be quarterbacking a finals contender year after year after year. He needs to see that all the hard work he is putting in will soon pay off in a big way.
And the most exciting part for me, and for the team, is that in 2 years Jerryd could develop into a better player than Andre Miller has ever been. He’s not a great shooter, but he is as good as Miller and still improving (especially from 3). He’s got a vertical jump, a quick first step, and lateral quickness that Miller doesn’t have. He has the ability to catch the ball on the wing and go straight to the hoop without a moment’s hesitation.
In a weird way, Andre Miller has proven that Jerryd Bayless is everything we WANT in a PG, he just isn’t a finished product yet. And luckily we have the luxury of waiting because Miller is here until Jerryd is ready.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
by StuckeyDuck on Apr 14, 2010 12:47 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
Thank you!
Proud supporter of Martell 'The Definition' Webster
by mannyfresh1 on Apr 14, 2010 12:52 AM PDT up reply actions
The only thing similar between Miller and Bayless
is they both lack an outside jumpshot. Their games couldnt be farther apart otherwise. Like it or not, the way each player thinks the game is the defining difference between them. If you don’t want to call it BBIQ, call it instincts. Miller has the instincts of a floor general, Bayless has the instincts of a scorer. Those are two very different worlds.
And the most exciting part for me, and for the team, is that in 2 years Jerryd could develop into a better player than Andre Miller has ever been
Miller walked into the league averaging nearly 9 assists per 36, with just shy of a 3 to 1 turnover ratio. Thinking that Bayless could ever be better than Andre Miller in his prime is seriously under appreciating just how good of a point guard Andre Miller is and was.
Where's Rudolfo?
as you say, they are very different players, but I don’t think its out of the question that Bayless could be on Andre’s level in 2 years. Not at all.
I disagree in every way possible.
I just don’t believe in “instincts”. The idea that some there is some sort of mental ability that Andre has, but Bayless lacks is not convincing. What Andre has that Bayless lacks is 10+ years in the league. Andre Miller “came in” averaging 9 assists per 36, but he “came out” after 4 years in college and a run to the national title game under the great Rick Majerus. To say that Miller just “had it”, is a vast oversimplification. Miller benefited from 4 years of spectacular coaching and a wealth of experience that comes from playing on a team that makes a deep tourney run.
Bayless had 1 year at Arizona where the coaching situation was a mess and spent a good deal of time injured, before they got bounced in the first round of the tourney.
I fully appreciate the career Andre Miller has had and he has been incredible for us this year. There is absolutely nothing that suggests to me that Bayless can’t play the game the same way and as effectively as Miller with more experience and seasoning. The coaching staff NEEDS to make his development a major priority. They aren’t identical players, but they both have the same strengths. They both have the same weaknesses. In addition, Bayless has physical gifts that Miller has never had. Bayless just needs to be coached into the guy who can take over the position when Miller runs out of gas in a year or two.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
Curious StuckeyDuck
Have you ever excelled at sports?
Truth is most athletes who excel at sports, especially at leadership, do so by instinct.
If Bayless would have stayed in college, I might agree with you, and possibly he could have developed as you imply, but theres no way he’s going to get enough burn to learn how to manage game time situations in the NBA.
His best hope is to develop a consistent outside shot, and become an off the bench instant scoring type of guy. I haven’t seen anything from him to think he’s every going to be better then a marginal PG.
Yes.
I see very strong leadership qualities in Bayless, and that may actually be instinctual. Passion, dedication, determination, work ethic, all that. Bayless has those qualities. I’m surprised you haven’t noticed that.
What is not “instinctual” is being a point guard. Decision making, running an offense, being a floor general, picking your spots. All those things must be coached. Bayless is dying to soak up that kind of teaching. Nate and the rest of his staff need to give it to him. He absolutely can get enough burn to master the PG position as long as the organization doesn’t give up on him. He is THE back-up to an aging PG. There are plenty minutes available as the 2nd PG for the next 1-2 years, and on top of that there are summers, training camps, practices.
Saying his only hope is to develop a jump shot and become a bench scorer is pretty . . . weak. That just isn’t true.
I can’t stand it when fans sell a guy short, or give up on him, because of something they don’t “see”. "He just doesn’t have it. " Bull crap. Coaches need to teach it.
I don’t know if you follow college football, but I’ve got a comparison for you. Former Oregon QB Dennis Dixon. He showed flashes when given the starting job as a junior, including leading the Ducks to big wins early in the season. Then he started throwing picks. He lost confidence, and Duck fans everywhere started saying how he didn’t have the “instincts” to be a quarterback. He was making the wrong reads. His decision making was flat out bad. He was replaced at the end of the year and it looked like he might not even be the starter the next season. People weren’t questioning his physical tools, they just said he didn’t have what it takes to be a QB. He didn’t have the “FBIQ”.
Then a new offensive coordinator was hired. He got one-on-one time working on his decision making, learning the playbook, and mastering the position. He entered the next season a different player. He turned into a “QB”. He through only 4 picks all year and turned into a Heisman front-runner before injury. Did he just wake up one day and all of a sudden have the right instincts??? NO! He got taught how to play the right way. He got a playbook tailored to his strengths. He got a coach who was invested in making him better. And that is how he got better.
Jerryd didn’t spend 4 years in college like Andre Miller. But that doesn’t mean he is done developing or can never learn how to run an offense. He wasn’t born unable to be a PG. He was just coached into being a scorer. Actually, he was just NOT coached into how to be a passer.
We have a full NBA coaching staff, a young and raw PG with every tool necessary to be every bit as effective as our current starting PG, and you would rather him “develop a consistent outside shot, and become an off the bench instant scoring type of guy?” Wow.
How about he develop a knowledge of the nuances of the NBA game and on-court chemistry with his teammates and become the PG we want? You can already tell that is just something he is incapable of???
If you were to tell me that we were handing the keys to the franchise over to Jerryd tomorrow, I’d be worried. But thinking about that as a possibility a year or two down the line just gets me excited. Experience. Coaching. Practice. Thats all he needs. He’s got the rest.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
by StuckeyDuck on Apr 14, 2010 3:13 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
If you don't believe in instincts.
What separates Nic Batum from Travis Outlaw? Both have similar body types and are uber athletic. Why is Batum so much better than Outlaw, despite being 5 years younger and having 4 less years of nba experience?
Where's Rudolfo?
lateral movement, for 1
Travis never had the ability to stay in front of a player on defense because he is slow side to side. Defense has been Nic’s calling card.
That is tough to answer, because I'd been calling for Travis to be traded for years.
I guess its not instincts, but an ability to soak up instruction and use it. Travis has been in the league for 7 years and the only thing he has improved has been his ability to create his own shot and knock it down. He’s a poor passer, a poor rebounder, a poor ball handler, a poor on ball defender, a poor help defender, and he took a frustrating amount if BAD shots. I think he showed year in and year out that the deficient parts of his game would continue to be ignored in order to improve his ability to score.
Batum is a lot like Bayless in the way that they are both sponges. The seem to soak it all up. There was that article about Batum and Monty a few weeks back when Monty ripped him for looking for his own shot instead of focusing on D. Batum came out the next game and did exactly what Monty asked and got great results. That is coachability.
I think Bayless is coachable the same way. I don’t think the coaches are doing a great job coaching him though. People keep complaining that all Jerryd does is drive to the hoop and try to draw a foul. I can almost guarantee you that is what Nate tells him to do when he enters the game. Jerryd really needs the staff to help him EXPAND his game. If given the coaching and opportunity, I’m very confident he’ll do that.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
At 19, 3 games into his rookie season, Batum was the best perimeter defender on the team
How can you say that is anything but natural instincts and a natural feel for the game? I don’t understand how you can argue that BBIQ, or instincts, or whatever you want to call don’t exist. You concede that it might have been an ability to soak up instructions, but wouldn’t that be the same thing as an ability to play the game smarter, or BBIQ?
I don’t think the coaches are doing a great job coaching him though.
This is quite the assumption, apparently the coach’s don’t want Jerryd to be a point guard? I agree with you that Nate probably encourages him to be aggressive going to the hoop, but that is his strength as a player, and Nate wants to take advantage of it. What Nate doesnt do is discourage him from running the team, I guarantee that. Can you imagine how silly that would sound? “OK Jerryd, I want you to go into the game, pound out the shot clock and hurl yourself into 3 defenders while yelping for a foul. If you are feeling fiesty, dribble into that 22 foot 2 point jump shot without making a single pass”. I guarantee they are working with him everyday on how to run the team, and he is not responding as of yet. I am not sure where you get this idea that he is a sponge waiting to soak up knowledge. I think he wants to get better, I think he is trying, I just havent seen any improvement whatsoever since the trade in his ability to run a team and make decisions. It almost seems like he has gotten worse and is now drastically over thinking the role he is in.
Where's Rudolfo?
because Batum had played baskeball before
he wasn’t tabula rasa.
Now I’m not going to say that one player is dumb and another is smart. However, intelligence is a major factor on defense, so is kinetic intelligence, the ability to know where ones own body and other bodies are in space and the ability to make predictions about the speed of objects.
Then, “instinct” is drilled in. Under stress, you default to the level of your training. How much did a player focus on defense? How much did they care about it? How long have they been drilling it?
Beyond a certain level of capabilities, it’s not about what you’re born with, it’s how hard you work with what you have.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Apr 14, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions
crap crap crap
Bayless is not a PG, and a barely manageable NBA player.
Next?
pg
Well, we were debating whether Bayless can be an NBA PG last year and we are still arguing it.
I wonder if we will still be arguing it next year. I guess the hard deadline is by the time he is 37 or so years old we can stop debating that.
The one thing I do agree with the article is don’t get too hung up on what makes a PG. You can have a successful team where the PG tasks are distributed among the players.
To me the question is not whether Bayless has the ability to be an NBA point guard. To me the question is does Bayless have the ability to be an NBA player period.
I have no doubt he has the innate talent to play in the NBA. I think his problem is that he is so unsure of himself that he simply freezes and does nothing when he’s got possession of the ball. Kind of surprising for a cocky guy like him. Is this mental freeze so ingrained in him that it can’t be fixed? I don’t know.
But just like the situation last year, there is a limit to how much effort the Blazers can afford to make to get this guy on track. The team has plenty of other challenges it has to focus on as well.
Bayless
“And the most exciting part for me, and for the team, is that in 2 years Jerryd could develop into a better player than Andre Miller has ever been. He’s not a great shooter, but he is as good as Miller and still improving (especially from 3).”
I would say, maybe in 2 years Bayless could develop into a better shooter than Andre.
He most certainly is not now.
First of all, drives to the rim for layups. Bayless has better strength in plowing into the paint. Miller has far better judgement about when to make a drive, and his finesse and craftiness far outweigh Bayless’ brute strenght in the paint.
Second, Miller has an outstanding midrange jumper. And he can make them off-balance as well as straight on.
Bayless appears to have the POTENTIAL to be a fine shooter of long-range 2’s and 3 pointers. But so far he is so inconsistent on those that his jumper is much more of a liability for the team than an asset.
So as to shooting, Andre Miller right now is a much better shooter than Jerryd Bayless.
I do believe Bayless has the potential to become a much better shooter. We had better hope he can, because that is a necessary but not sufficient condition for him to become a genuine asset to this team.
however
However, the one thing I do think Bayless deserves credit for his that he has improved on defense. I’d say he has improved from poor to average.
And that’s not to be taken lightly. If you want to be a good defensive team you want your whole squad to be average to good in defensive ability.
Another guy who has improved his defense is Aldridge, I don’t think he’s gotten much credit for that yet though.
Instincts cannot be coached
Bayless has quite a few strengths- athleticism, speed, desire to play defense, an ability to create his own shot and a scorer’s mentality.
What he lacks is what Andre excels at. Andre is floor general who is always in control of himself and the game. Andre is a master at changing speeds and taking advantage of what he can do on the court.
Andre has developed and become better due to experience, but to expect Bayless to develop into a more athletic Miller is beyond optimistic, it just ignore the nature of what players are.
Certain players have “it” at an early age: Batum is one who just has a great feel for the game and knows when to make decisions. He is a multi dimensional player who will be an all star very soon.
Travis is the other end of the spectrum, he did develop a jump shot and developed into a scorer, but the understanding of the game just never developed.
Now, one guy who was between positions and developed into an All Star was Chauncey Billups. Unfortunately, there are a dozen Jarrett Jack/Randy Foye types who can’t make that leap from scoring point to solid floor general.
I have a son who plays PG in middle school. He understands the game and where people are on the court and “just knows” how the pieces fit on the court. He is 11 years old but he seems to have “it”. And no, I do not take credit for his gift.
I believe that true point guards just have the conceptual ability to see how things fit on the court and to an extent are “born” and not “created”.
Bayless can become a better player and may be an eventual fit next to Roy as a starter. But in no way should anyone expect him to become a more athletic Andre Miller.
Bayless and Miller aren't identical.
But the strengths and weaknesses of each of their games run parallel to eachother. What I’m saying is that when Bayless finally develops into a starting caliber PG (and I firmly believe that will happen eventually), he’ll be able to slide in the hole vacated by Andre Miller’s retirement and the team won’t skip a beat. Roy and the rest of the guys don’t have to play with a “type 1” PG when Miller is in the game and then adjust to a “type 2” PG when Bayless is in. They’re not identical, but they play the same game. Ball dominant. Both drive to the hoop relentlessly. Both are iffy shooters, but reliable for mid range. And Miller has PROVEN that that type of PG can be very, very successful with this team. The myth that Roy needs to play with a spot up 3-point shooter has been busted.
We now have, on our roster, right now, 2 point guards that are great fits for this team. One is experienced, polished, playing great, vital to our success this year, but old and getting older. The other is young, raw, inexperienced, prone to stretches of poor play, but also young, athletic, improving, and with a great work ethic.
I just really don’t see why some people think Bayless can NEVER be that guy, or that we need to go in a different direction already. I agree that Bayless isn’t that guy today, but all the evidence points to a guy that might just be perfect a year or two down the line. And in the mean time we have the luxury of being able to wait because we have the guy we want already starting for us.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
Disagree
Bayless isnt even a good back up at the position right now. Why so many people want to defend this very average player is beyond me.
And please don’t compare Bayless to Miller, that’s such a disservice to Andre.
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
I've never said anything about Bayless being good right now.
Its the people that say he will never be good, or never fit right, or never make it on this team that I have an issue with. There is no reason why this 21 year old second year point guard can’t develop into a starter.
I see many more reasons why it WILL happen then reasons why it WON’T happen.
"I don't feel like I'm going to be happy or complete until I'm an All-Star. My favorite example is that it took Chauncey six, seven years. And Chauncey's been a mentor for me, and I've learned a lot from him in these last couple years. So, people can say what they want, but I'll get the last laugh. " - Bayless
by StuckeyDuck on Apr 15, 2010 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions
Bayless is uncrafty
He can draw and sometimes dish, if an offensive player happens to be nearby.
But when he has the ball with less than 10 seconds on the shot clock, we all know he’s about to take a contested 20’ jumper, which he will make infrequently.
C'mon
The guy’s a young bull. You know young bulls aren’t experienced but you still wouldn’t get in front of one. In 2 or 3 years he’ll be a fine player off the bench for a lucky team. Just maybe not the Blazers
See now i can live with this
You’re right. he’ll never be a Stephen Curry, but perhaps he’ll be a nice complimentary combo guard for some lucky team down the road. A poor man’s Vinny ‘the microwave’ Johnson if you will.
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
How our hopes have fallen
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
I don't get how Rudy and Martell aren't ideal matches for a penetrating point guard.
It goes without saying that having Ginobili, Melo, or JR Smith would make any point guard look better because of the attention they command. Rudy and Martell have their merits though. Both move well without the ball and are great guys to have on the business end of a draw and kick. Howard, LMA, and Cunningham are also good mid-range shooters to run the pick and pop with. Bayless’ strength is getting to the rim off the dribble, and the team has given him carte blanche to do that since Miller and Roy are the only other guards who can. He would be terrible if he was used like Blake. (To be fair, his jumper has really improved from last year.) Granted, Bayless might be a poor match for Rudy and Martell, but a slashing point guard has no gripe when he has two spot up shooters of that calibre to dish to. If anything, Bayless hurts them more running the point than they hurt his game.
As far as shot creation: Rudy’s probably going to be gone next year and I agree that it’s important that the Blazers find someone who can move them away from being a jumpshooting team. If they find a slasher, Bayless may need to develop his game elsewhere.
Keep your expectations low and you won't be disappointed.
I don’t get how Rudy and Martell aren’t ideal matches for a penetrating point guard.
. It’s loyal fans trying to make excuses for a very average player by pulling the victim card for him and saying ’it’s not his fault – it’s everyone else’s.
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Apr 14, 2010 10:41 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
thanks
although the original poster did an (almost) correct analysis of Bayless, the fact still remains, Bayless is what he is.
We have held on to average players, as prospects, because they have talent (some very marginal) but enough potential to warrant keeping until they (possibly) mature. The coaching staff has taken on monumental duties at teaching these kids the fundamentals they could have learned by staying in college….development of players at the NBA level is high risk and no guarantees.
The next level should see the mix of these ’potential players" diminish and more proven players fill the roster
The issue that I see is style of play/team identity…what is this teams identity? We have already seen a minor shift in this teams approach, due to the acquisition of Miller, Camby, and to some extent, Howard. While attempting to fill voids and understanding the value of veteran leadership the organization has discovered a new appraoch to winning games. (thank goodness)
Where do we go from here? We are not there yet but have much better oppotunities to get to the next level because we have a more solid foundation to build from. The bench is weak, no one can argue that…this is where the target is
Inevitably it will end up in the coaches hands….And Nate….well lets just say Nate’s “dump truck” approach is not a good fit for open court style players. (Rudy) ….Sadly, our star, Roy does not like to run and is better suited for a grind it out half court game
Sorry, I’m an old school Blazer fan…Although you need a mix (or fexibility) in offensive approaches, we are shorting some of the youthful players on this team with this slow and deliberate style , …. IMO opinion we need to add some bango and bongo to our bingo. You know, “lickity brindle” up the floor, We have the players that can run, but it is not practiced much and so our efficiency in this area is lacking….
examples of players that can run the floor and IMO in order of capabilities/effectiveness
1. Batum
2. LMA
3. Rudy
4. Camby(great instincts and flexible)
5. Miller(can’t finish sometimes, but has good court awareness)
6. Mills(quickness and better BBIQ than Bayless)
of course it is good defense and a subsequent fast transition mentality that jumpstarts a fast break…bingo-bango-bongo
…Oh about Bayless(we can’t make a point guard out of him….it ain’t in the genes)… please replace him with Mills and add him to my skeptical list
Outlaw, Sergio, Webster, Oden
sorry about Oden he gets on the list as mathematical casualty
This summer is about moving on and I hope we approach it as such….
I'm an old school Blazer fan, as well
And I’m less concerned about “shorting some of the youthful players on this team with this slow and deliberate style” than I am about winning playoff series and another championship or two. Rather than tailor a “bing-bango-bongo” attack around the speed of Rudy-Nic-LMA, the emphasis should continue to be placed upon acquiring and developing players who can complement the team’s real stars (Brandon and Greg)
Miller and Camby are a step in the right direction. If Fernandez, Webster and Bayless aren’t the right “fit” for the team’s future, then don’t break the mold and start over, replace these players on the roster. What Andre and Marcus have brought to the team this season is superior BBIQ and interior passing (as well as better communication on defense) That’s not necessarily a running style, but it’s definitely a smarter one. Believe me, I don’t want to see a stagnant offense where Roy and Oden dominate the ball any more than you do, but neither do I want to see a free-flowing offensive (SSOL) system, because when push comes to shove in the playoffs, championship teams need to be able to execute their half court offense and defense. That means working on it consistently from training camp through June, and not “trying out new things with the second unit” during the regular season.
So rather than get smaller and faster (Patty Mills, etc) the Blazers need to get taller and tougher (and older, and smarter) Like I said, Miller and Camby are a step in the right direction. Let’s keep the “slow and deliberate” style around as long as Roy and Oden are the franchise’s best players, because that’s the time-tested formula for NBA playoff success
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Once again, you're preaching to the choir
We had bingo-bango-bongo last night. It was fun! But you won’t win games.
I understand your logic
And up front, it’s the most probable path of least resistance (at the moment.) However, my point of view has some merit. (even though I’m immensely bias towardas a running team)
1. We were the stagnant and predictable Roy, Oden, and LMA halfcourt team until Miller got here. Then with the injuries and the acquisition of Camby we evolved into a different team. (but I really don’t think it was the plan, given the events with Roy, Nate, and Miller at the start of the season.) So technically, by default, we became the team we are currently. This team runs the floor much better and we have raised our points in the paint because of it….
2. Before, our half court offense was only as good as Roy, LMA and the 3 point shot . But LMA had to hit his jump shots and we had to hit 3’s to keep the defense honest. Teams that defended the 3’s and ones that stopped Roy at the top of the key shut us down in a hurry….We had no variations to fall back on and it was begginning to get too easy for the good defensive teams to stop us….These are the teams we will face in the playoffs
3.The old saying that if you play good defense, the offense generally takes care of itself is the most honest words of wisdom to ever come out of a coaches mouth. (Jack Ramsey) He used this to support his team of Blazer’s who were, quite honestly, the best team I’ve ever seen play the game . This team ran people right off the floor. A team with really only one star. A team that caught all the dominate half court teams flat-footed and wore them out.
Some people have said, you have to have a good half court team to win in the playoffs. This became a popular point of view when Chicago and Detroit beat the running teams of Drexler and company in the 90’s. I maintain that we were just one player short (the lumbering Duckworth) of going all the way.
So, since I’ve been around for awhile…long enough to wtiness the two most successful teams in Portland…. both running, high gear teams..then I may be better understood, when I lean heavily towards this style of play
add #4. How can we build a team around Oden? He is not a star on this team…he is still a dream…could he be a difference maker? Possibly is the only logical answer….
I will concede this; our half court game is much improved with Camby and Miller. It has more options and does include fast break points and easier “at the rim” hoops, In other words, we are much more flexible than the “prediction offense” of before.
I have to disagree about the playoffs, it’s not how good your half cout offense is..it’s how good your defense is and how much you can keep teams on their heels and behind your play (easy hoops) . First you out-smart them, then you out play them. Wear them out, use your youth as an advantage for now…when they get older, they can slow down some ……
Concede again, the fact that we have Roy and Oden (or at least Roy) If you do step to the plate and say this is what we have, and this is our future, then I will have to swallow my pride and say do the best we can with these two….I’ve went through 2 generations of Blazer teams in my days..this team belongs to you guys.
I really don’t think it was the plan, given the events with Roy, Nate, and Miller at the start of the season
The plan was to diversify the offense, that’s why Andre was signed in July. Roy and LMA resisted this change during the preseaon (remember “option 1 and option 2”?) but by mid-season they both understood better what Miller could do to help them. Some of that was “running out” but not all. ’Dre also could post up small PGs and collapse the defense, which led to easy baskets for all of his teammates.
We had no variations to fall back on and it was begginning to get too easy for the good defensive teams to stop us
Again, that was why first Hedo and finally Miller were pursued last July. Camby (instead of Outlaw) has also raised the team’s BBIQ and interior passing ability in the half-court offense, since the trade.
The old saying that if you play good defense, the offense generally takes care of itself
This is true during the regular season, but good teams won’t let you run much in the playoffs, especially in the finals. Defense is very important, but half-court execution is even more so, because every possession is magnified. Fortunately, Nate and Dean are already risk-averse turnover-tabulating coaches so their players are better-prepared for this than the average NBA team.
It’s a shame the Blazers won’t have Roy (or Blake) to demonstrate how effective they could be against Phoenix, like they were earlier in the season when Portland won both games against the Suns. Phoenix is playing better now, and the Blazer’s remaining backcourt is basically Andre Miller and whole lot of inconsistency. It won’t be “lack of running” that causes Portland to struggle in round 1, it will be a lack of experience and missed perimeter shots—and not enough size (I’m talking weight, not height) to deal with Amare, down low.
how much you can keep teams on their heels and behind your play (easy hoops) . First you out-smart them, then you out play them. Wear them out, use your youth as an advantage
The Drexler/Adelman team used to get by on their youth and atheleticism until they faced experienced half-court teams in the finals. Then their fast break points dried up and they were out-executed in the half court. San Antonio has used the same strategy as the Pistons and the Bulls and the Spurs have 4 trophies—that’s what I want to see from Roy-Oden before they retire as Blazers
Pretty basketball is fun to watch, but if you lose the last game of every season and never win it all, even the prettiest style of play gets old. Dr. Jack’s teams didn’t do so well after 1977, did they? Maybe it’s time to let go of the past and embrace a style of play that could win championships in the future? For all of Oden’s problems up to this point of his career, there will be no rings in the near future for Portland if Greg isn’t a big part of the team’s offense and defense—and you had better believe the front office is still building the team with #52 smack in the middle of their plans
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Well we are certainly in a position to agree to disagree
.
The plan was to diversify the offense, that’s why Andre was signed in July. Roy and LMA resisted this change during the preseaon (remember "option 1 and option 2"?) but by mid-season they both understood better what Miller could do to help them. Some of that was "running out" but not all. ’Dre also could post up small PGs and collapse the defense, which led to easy baskets for all of his teammates.
Yes this was the plan…..Nate also resisted ……and the only justification for this was “this was Roy’s team” So Andre you figure out how to fit in..(why is this not possible? because in effect, you are nulifing what Andre can do. He’s not a spot up shooter, but he is a legitimate floor general Come on, this team had a closed mind to change, period… It was all over the news from the qualified sections…Portland was beatable because they not only lacked instinctive inovation they were entrenched in a style of play that was completely predictable. We arrived at this “new look” team becasue of injuries and we had no other choice…the addition of Camby solidified the structure. Without the proven examples from Miller and Camby, we would be the team that you desire……Miller traded and if Oden not hurt, no Camby….in other words a theory yet to prove itself in the playoffs and a make believe foundation for what the next level is . there are just to many unanswered questions to determine much of anything yet. the only test we have is the current make up we now have.
Structure is fine, if not limited by boundaries….but tying players down too much doesn’t allow the game to played naturally. You can’t hold down instinctive basketball skills. They are not only part of the more athletic players of today, but they are also a fundamental of basketball itself. I think Nate may have learned something this year….it’s OK to be the boss, but you also have to recognize your individually skilled players who may be able to get an easier result, if given the freedom to do so.
So you see, IMO you are holding onto the past as well….an open court style of play is more suited to the more youthful and athletically talented players in the NBA today….Half court teams are fast being replaced by teams that can do both and can utililize the skills of the five particular players who are on the court.
It’s just not suited for the “invisioned” franchise players of Roy and Oden.
I don’t see many A and B skill level NBA players that productive in a support role on a team. (Jefferson in San Antone, Artest in LA,. Turk in Toronto, Sheed in Boston). So building or maintaining a championship team is a more difficult task than one can imagine. A championship team in Portland in the next five years, is quite honestly, very unlikely… but getting deeper into the playoffs is more possible….I see a different avenue and also IMO a more productive and entertaining one….An enjoyable event and satisfied that although they may not win a championship, they are fun to watch along the way.
Running teams are infectious and rousing..they give you the home court advantage because they ignite the fans…I’ve been to 2 games this year and although the fans were loud, they were nothing like the fans in 75-78 years. those games were won before they even started…but they still played the game anyway..
.
It won’t be "lack of running" that causes Portland to struggle in round 1, it will be a lack of experience and missed perimeter shots—and not enough size (I’m talking weight, not height) to deal with Amare, down low.
I couldn’t pass this up….I ‘m not concerned about the playoffs this year…it is an opportunity to get some valued experience…Roy and Oden are out…this team will have to take advantage of the Suns sometimes ’not there" defense.this means getting opportunities from your defense and fast transition into offense….we have little other choice but to (sort of) beat them at their own game add in relentless and persuing defense and ownership of the ball( every loose ball is yours) .. as for Amare, he is not stopable. His face up skills need an immediate double team and he has the best support player in the league in Nash to get the ball to him at the hoop, Since the trading deadline, Amare has come to play every game. this gives them possibly the best 1-2 punch in the league. Nah, I can’t say that stopping Amare is dependent on a big weighted player. He’s both strong and quick…who would have the better chance of stopping him? Camby vs Oden….Camby has the edge because he can come out on him…Oden would have to guard him from 10 feet and in and even then he would need a double team for help. Amare would be a handful and will need team defense to stop….then you still need the quickness to cover the perimeter (second options)….sure wish I could prove my point, but Oden is not playing…..Hope you get a chance to prove yours someday….I’d gladly eat some crow, even if it still leaves me wanting…..
Oh, by the way, I do agree Portland is “all in” on Oden…they’ve put their chips in his pot and will need to see it through at least one more season…this being a injury free, productive one…after that all bets are off…..the CBA and KP’s status are sideline issues that cloud it up some……Most owners are saying a lockout is probable in 2011
Nate also resisted ……and the only justification for this was "this was Roy’s team" So Andre you figure out how to fit in
I’m a Nate realist, as opposed to the many McMillian “pessimists” that form the vocal minority on this site and elsewhere. Is the head coach perfect? No. But he has the confidence of the owner and has done nothing (to my knowledge) to put his job in immediate jeopardy. So the realist in me says “why be like Dwight Jaynes and always complain about Nate, since he’s going to be the coach for the forseeable future and do things the way he sees fit, regardless?”
If McMillian was so inflexible and Roy-centric, he wouldn’t have been interested in acquring Miller and potentially implementing the kind of changes that Andre would bring to the roster—but (instead) we know that Nate was very excited after the dinner in Vegas with ‘Dre, and spoke glowingly to reporters re: what Miller could bring to the roster. Now, I admit that I have no idea what happened between July and October and why Nate clung to the notion that a second unit led by Miller would be a good idea. But in the long run…it doesn’t matter, because there’s no way that the team will return to that rotation in the future.
We can say that “Nate has learned something this year” or that " he never would’ve started Andre if there hadn’t been any injuries" but that’s impossible to know with any certainty. There have been numerous examples of Nate imploring the team to push the tempo from the sidelines his cries never seemed to be heeded nearly as well “before Miller” as after. Nate’s critics would make it seem like that Andre has dragged the team forward into an uptempo system in spite of Nate and Brandon’s kicking and screaming. I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle. Yes, Nate and Dean wanted the team to run (“when it was there”) but also to take care of the ball and execute the halfcourt offense efficiently when it wasn’t. Miller has provided a better opportunity to achieve both of these goals than Blake, Sergio or Bayless. So “the change” happened, and what might have happened if players A,B,C were all healthy is irrelevant, at least to me.
an open court style of play is more suited to the more youthful and athletically talented players in the NBA today
That’s the easy way to win regular season games and build excitement amongst the fanbase, but it doesn’t achieve the ultimate goal of winning the championship, at least not if NBA history is any indicator. Cleveland lost to Orlando (and Dwight Howard) last spring, did they go out and add smaller, quicker players to their roster during the offseason? No, they acquired Shaq. The L*kers are the longest team in the WC, to advance to the finals you have to be able to match up with them. Until there’s a run of NBA championships that are won by small-ball lineups, I’d rather not play the bluff hand and hope for the best. Portland’s got size, they just need to keep it healthy, and surround Oden with shooters and tough perimeter defenders. Roy shouldn’t need to do as much in the future as he’s had to do in the past to insure that Portland wins games down the stretch. Brandon and LMA have learned by watching Andre and Marcus make the read and the scoring pass, so the ball movement that you desire to see is coming. But not at the expense of tough post-up play and turnover control
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Yes
We have Nate and he’s the boss…it’s real and not arguable….Many people second guess his actions from game to game….I don’t ( it’s usually never the coach that loses the game any more than the coach winning it.)
It’s really all about the players in the NBA and this is where I draw some argument that could be directed at Nate. Why ? IMO to be a good coach in the NBA you must recognize the talents of your players and also have the ability (along with your staff) to develop solid fundamentals and the atmosphere of team ball. (this is why I don’t like the one on one play generated out of half court sets….it tends to make spectators out of the rest of the team) However, we look to be slowly weaning ourselves away to less Roy iso’s and more variations in our offense…. and this is good for several reasons stated before
Now when the Blazers decided to rebuild with youth, it instantly became a monumental task for any coaching staff to endure . Because the game has changed so much (by drafting talented but less experienced players)…The fundamentals that may be taught and or refined in college don’t happen until they get to the NBA. Nate was, and probably, still is, the best coach available out there. My comment that he may have learned something was generated out of a thought that he was initially in over his head with all the young talent to develop…. (and still get a competitive NBA product onto the floor every day.) This is a scrutiny spotlight that most coaches hate but comes with the territory…
.I think Nate and the rest of the organization now realizes you can’t have all youth that are expected to ‘grow" into a championship team… You need a good mix of savy veterans to compliment and possibly tutor the youngsters. Of course the timing of all this to come together and is always diluted by possibly injuries,competitors, players peak, etc…..
My knock on Nate would be my puzzelment about how Andre was initially accepted….In other words, I thought they knew they were getting a point guard/floor general to run the offense and take some pressure off of Roy….a new approach that could really only be accomplished the Miller way (if it was going to work like it should), IMO The “stubbornness” of Nate and also his contentment with his game plan and players stood in the way of a possible progression to the next level. In other words you may have to bite all the way into the bullit (even fall back some) to get to point “B”….
I grant this; Us people, in here, are only arm chair speculators, with no consequences for our comments. (we are not capable of any actions beyond pounding some computer keys) So Nate’s job is all about reality, as you said, and all of us in here are just opinionated second guessers.
One last comment about big men……IMO The slow, lumbering half court big men, that use their size for an advantage, are becoming less and less prominent in basketball today. They are being replaced by faster athletic players that still have enough size to post up, but can also run the floor, score from the outside and be quick enough to rotate on defense. The “power forward” of yesterday has been replaced by an inside-outside and more agile profile. It’s just not the same anymore (in part due to the 3 point shot and zone defense) Shaq is a tank and easily the best post up player the NBA has ever had….But full dimensional big men are emerging as a majority in the NBA talent pool….Oden ? Will we ever find out if he fits fulfils our needs?
I agree that Nate still has to prove he can be a coach who can do more than rebuild a young roster into a playoff team. He may or may not be able to take the Blazers all the way to a championship. If he doesn’t win this series against Phoenix, Paul Allen might start having some second thoughts about McMillian’s future, regardless of the injury situation. Nate asked for veterans last summer and KP obliged, so the team is now out of the rebuilding mode and onto the contending stage. Players like Bayless, Rudy and Webster will have to adapt, or be replaced like Outlaw was
As afar as “plodding big men” go, it’s certainly true that not every team “has got to have” a stiff center on their roster anymore, like back in the ‘70s-80s. However, if you’re lucky enough to draft one of the few dominant centers that come along every 5 years or so, it’s to your advantage to build a team around him and make the other teams (who are playing PFs out of position at the 5) pay during the post season. Size does matter, when the players have equal skill.
Portland has been beaten down this year by teams like Utah and Denver because they didn’t have Greg and Joel in the lineup. The game that the L*kers won at the RG this spring, Odom had 20 rebounds, that doesn’t happen against Camby and Oden.
So, as much as the game has changed and “stretch 4s” are shooting 3-pointers I still don’t agree that Portland needs to play that style on offense, they just have to be able to defend the perimeter adequately, get stops and secure the rebounds. Then use their size on offense to create mismatches and play “inside-out”
This style of offense was first seen when Houston had Olayuwon down low and 3-point shooters (like Kenny Smith) spotting up behind the arc. It may not be a “pretty” system, but it’s extremely difficult to defend when the post player can score in the paint, shoot FTs and is a willing passer. Like Tim Duncan has been, like Greg Oden could be
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I think we found out, this year, that the business end (PA) is in control. 5 years ago we had nowhere to go but up and the franchise was in the red. It looks like Vulcan has convinced Allen that his ventures into sports cannot just be a hobby.(Allen had admitted that his venture into Portland’s NBA franchise was cost effective, but experimental at the time [he loved the game of baskball] ) …..Either sell and cut your loses or jump in and find some solutions for the stability needed to punch up the bottom line…In other words Paul Allen is “growing” as a businessman. His expectations are higher and his tolerences lower. He re-invested his money back into the franchise and it’s growing…now he expects some return and it probably won’t be long term.
As an owner, Allen has been good for the people of Portland. But no one can expect a businessman to be their hero. The contract with Comcast is all about money and has left us people that live outside of Portland (the 150 mile group) , with not much view and little choices. We are the “cheap seat fans” or some may say the freebees (although we do pay our satellite fees) It reminds me quickly about the business approach and how the money angle is what really matters….. For all we know, it just may be a building process for a higher sale price…..(just a thought, no basis) Luckily the investment in the Rose Garden is a substantial asset for keeping the team in Portland
IMO the drafting of Oden was correct…The upside was there, and i agree he could have been a key in getting us into championship contention….You simply can’t pass up a quality big man.
I think we all invisioned what could be. But realism takes over in a hurry. Like the add says, “life comes at you fast” and you have to have alternatives to the many setbacks that are very likely to be thrown in your path….The odds are always against you, Chances and timing are generally short lived. Next season we should be close to the fork in the road and then hard decisions may need to be made….It’s hardly a failing franchise and contentment may allow more soak time…I guess, very soon, we may find out how aggressive our persuit of the next level will be.
Bayless
Bayless has shown flashes of brilliance amidst a career so far that screams “mediocre”. I think he could be a good NBA player at some point.
One thing that I hope is better recognized going into next year is that the Blazers actually had two major problems this year- injuries and disappointing progress from several of the younger players.
The latter is the bigger concern in the long term. I don’t know the cause, whether it is the individual players not getting their act together or inability of the coaches to recognize the strengths and weaknesses of the young guys and steer the team in a way that helps the young guys be all that they can be. Bayless is the poster boy for this problem.
At any rate, we will soon have an off season for the team to try to come to grips with this. In the meantime, thank God we have some old veterans that are playing close to all-star caliber ball despite being in the twilight of their careers.
by lsjogren on Apr 15, 2010 10:05 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I would take mediocre
What he gives us is flashes of brilliance and yuck, and mostly yuck.
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
yeah
although:
One thing that I hope is better recognized going into next year is that the Blazers actually had two major problems this year- injuries and disappointing progress from several of the younger players.
Arguably, the injuries are the big concern. If Roy’s and Oden’s injury concerns continue, that would singlehandedly be enough to keep us from every winning a championship. Role players can be had. Studs like those guys…
I'd bet my house that if Mills had the same amount of experience running the point
in this system as Jerryd has had – Mills would be the backup PG right now. And that’s not really saying too much.
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
Exactly
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
It all about the opportunity
In his first 2 years in the league, Jarrett Jack played 4250 minutes. He was the 22nd pick in the 2005 draft. The Blazers were a bad team that was rebuilding, so he had the opportunity to play a lot.
In his first 2 years in the league, Jerryd Bayless played 1959 minutes. Even though he was a lottery choice, his opportunities have been limited because his team is a contender
Patty Mills played 38 minutes in the NBA this year. He was the 55th selection in the 2009 draft. He had the opportunity to practice against the other Blazer guards for most of the season, so he had ample opportunity to demonstrate to the coaching staff his value as a potential rotation member.
Not every player gets the same opportunities to carve out playing time in the NBA. Sometimes injuries to key players open the door for a player’s “big break”. Other times, just when it looks like he’s ready to break out, he gets hurt or the team makes a deal that pushes him further back on the depth chart. It’s what you do with your opportunity when it arrives that’s important, and for Jerryd (on the NBA court and Patty (in practice) they’ve made an impression (for better or worse) with their coaches and team management. I think it’s fair to say that if they remain Blazers or not, it wasn’t because they weren’t given an opportunity, but that when opportunity knocked, they either stepped through the door…or they didn’t.
The only certainty is that there will be another draft in a few months, and 60 more young players will enter the league with the same opportunity that Bayless had in ’08 and Mills had this year. Some of these rookies will play a lot for rebuilding teams, others will be lucky to see any time out on the court for contending teams. But they will all be evaluated by NBA personnel, just the same
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I'll join that chant!
"I'm passing it down," Howard said. "Showing the guys that, hey, here's an example of a guy who played 16 years. If you don't want to listen and get the valuable, free information from him - soak it up like a sponge - then you've got to be a damn fool."
Forty-Eight Min-utes *clap,clap...clap,clap,clap*
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
JBay has 1 year of point guard experience
miller has been a point guard since junior high school. think about it.
by Sound_Automatic on Apr 15, 2010 12:30 PM PDT reply actions
Good post.
Anyway, so yesterday I was at the game and Jerryd walked down my section but my friend sat on the side and didn’t even notice. So I tried to whack his arm as he went by, but I missed and now I’m sad.
by ireallylikejerrydbayless on Apr 15, 2010 7:00 PM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Blazer's Edge
Related FanShots on Blazer's Edge
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Boston Celtics are moving on to the conference finals
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
