Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Knicks Beat Lakers With Familiar Strategy

Stand, Pat. Now sit. Staaaaaay...There's a good boy!

Hey BEdgers,

Recently over on Barrett's Blog, I indulged in a position-by-position breakdown of the Blazers and why I though we should stand pat until the end of the FIBA games. These posts were spread out primarily over the month of August. Enjoy.

 

Point Guard
Depth: Miller, Bayless, Roy

The majority of the minutes at PG should go to Jerryd Bayless. If you'd kindly remove your hand from my throat, I'll explain...

Whether or not you think JB is the mythical Point Guard of the Future Bom, bom, bommmmm (PGotF), the team has invested heavily in developing his game to fit the mold. Statistically, it's working. Upper Left Corner recently wrote an informative Fan Post regarding Jerryd's progress called Rethinking the Point. Because of how well ULC crafted his essay and how tireless a champion of Bayless he has been, I encourage y'all to read Rethinking the Point, as well as some of the comments that follow.

Of particular interest are Jerryd's stats in the playoff series against the Suns. ULC writes that JB was, "...shooting 40% from 3 pt range; posting a AST% of 28%, a TO% under 10, an AST/TO of 3:1". While the six game series offers a very small sample size, it gives an idea of how well he plays under pressure. His performance in these areas (especially 3pt. shooting) indicate that he could become the floor-stretching point guard this team needs.

To get a definitive answer to whether or not JB is the PGotF, he needs minutes. More than that, he needs playing time with Roy, Batum, and Oden. I think Andre should start, but Bayless should be brought in pretty early to get some run with the core. If it works, keep increasing his minutes throughout the season, slowly working Andre out of the system. If it doesn't work, put together a trade package sending Bayless to a team that can better fit his skill set, bringing in the next candidate for PGotF. Personally, I have faith that he will succeed. In a few years, the Jerryd Bayless/Armon Johnson one-two punch is going to knock the NBA's teeth out.

 

Shooting Guard

Rotation: Roy, Mathews, Batum, Bayless
DNPCD: Fernandez

This looks funky, and I might be jumping to conclusions regarding Batum's ability to play the 2, but I think he could take advantage of some mismatches there. I put Bayless at the bottom because if he can't swing it at PG, the team shouldn't be bending over backwards to give him Brandon's minutes.

Brandon's backup is a tricky issue. The Spaniard's grumbling has simplified things substantially, but there's no guarantee that won't be Wesley in a couple years, thinking he deserves more meat than is on the bird. The key to keeping our new backup happy will be his ability to play other positions. This leads to problems of it's own as his second position is SF, where there are two very talented young men in Batum and Cunningham. Luckily, they can move around too, but where does it stop? At what point do you just want your SF to be a SF, SG to be a SG, and your backup to be a backup?

To answer these role questions, time is needed. These guys need to work out the kinks together and figure out where they can make the best impact. Nate needs to tinker with lineups and looks. Roy needs to adjust to either fewer minutes or the point guard position. As much as I was hoping that this season would start with some clearly defined roles, the Mathews acquisition has thrown that all up in the air.

Many have come to the conclusion that Rudy has got to go. I agree, but I maintain that the team can get better value for him in a different climate. I think a lot of teams are reeling right now from an exciting summer and are not looking to be one of the "losers" of the off season.

Rudy is a good player and should not be "Sergioed". There is not a real need to get rid of him, and his stock will only rise as time goes on. I believe he's primed to make another splash in the FIBA competition, which should get some GMs salivating. Let them sweat. Let him sweat. Let everybody work themselves into a frenzy as news that he's unhappy continues to spread until trading partners know that any deal with Portland will have to include Rudy.

The other side of this is, you never know. Last season the team should have dumped "Rise With Us", and replaced it with "Them's the Breaks", or "Challenge = Opportunity". In other words, a time may come when the Blazers need number 5 again. It sure doesn't hurt to have the dude around (cheap, cheap, cheap!), his attitude just makes him unreliable. The easy answer to that is not to rely on him. There are certainly others in line...

 

Small Forward

Rotation: Batum, Batum (he's that good), Mathews, Cunningham

Small forward is strait up the most solid position going into this season. Provided everybody stays healthy, there should be nothing to worry about with these three. I don't know much about Mathews' game, but Batum and Cunningham are rapidly improving players with great minds and bodies for the game.

I cannot get over how impressed I was with Dante's rookie season. He demonstrated why four year college guys have a leg up on drop outs--he already looks like a polished rotation player. If DC can continue to grow his game, I think the Blazers should do whatever they can to keep him on the floor and lock him up long term. I don't have a preference as to whether he develops into more of a SF or a PF, as I think he's capable of either. There will be more minutes at SF for now but if LMA continues to stagnate, he might find a hungry Dante gobbling up his playing time. As we all know, the way to Nate's heart is through his defense and DC has certainly put in the time there.

 

Power Forward

Dream Rotation: Camby, LMA, Cunningham

Actual Rotation: LMA, Camby, Cunningham

Sometimes I think I'm too hard on LaMarcus. After all, he is a gifted player with a silky smooth mid-range game. Also, last season he was forced into a role that highlighted his weak spots due to The Plague of '09. Perhaps Oden will cover up those spots and I'll go slinking off into the night to spread my wicked lies elsewhere...but here's the beef: LMA is an awful passer. How does Oden fix that? Furthermore, how is Oden supposed to flourish if he's being fed in part by atrocious entry passes from the PF? This is why I think Camby should start.

Camby's high post game is super crafty. Not only is he a crisp passer, he can bury that wind-up jumper if he's given the space and time. Camby is also what I'd call a Tactical Rebounder, which compliments Oden who I'd call a Proximity Rebounder. Basically, Oden snuggles up to the basket, snags all the close bounces and stuffs in the thunderous put-backs, whereas Camby seems to stay ahead of the play, carefully positioning himself for the long bounces.

Personally, I don't subscribe to the idea that there are some skills that players can't learn, so I'll not count LMA out, but I do think he needs some motivation. Maybe losing his starting spot to an old-timer will inspire him to clean up his passing game. Who knows?

The problem with this idea is long term chemistry. Camby is likely gone after his contract, leaving a gaping hole in the front line. If a replacement hasn't been groomed, that could be a major setback. All the same, I'd hope that in a couple years our core will be experienced enough to find a groove with anybody.

 

Center

Rotation: Oden, Przybilla, Camby,

Our only option going forward for this position is simply to have faith and hold the course. The Oden/Przybilla tandem is the best center duo in the league. Their health is all that stands between this team and complete dominance. Unfortunately, that's been a pretty massive gulf recently. So much so that the Blazers had to go out and hunt down a short term replacement. It's a good thing they did too...

I think this season Camby should be getting most of his minutes at power forward, but having him around helps to ease my center concerns substantially. I don't think we're in for another run of bad luck, but it's great to have such a quality big man that can fill the gap were something to come up.

It's mainly Oden I'm worried about. Joel had a bad injury, then suffered a freak accident, but is already on track to start the season. I don't know where folks get off saying he's injury prone. Sure, he gets hurt too, but he bounces back and plays through the pain. At the start of the off season, I toyed with different ideas involving his expiring contract, but at the moment I don't see anyone out there that would impact the team like Joel does. He may not be the heart of the roster, but he sure as heck is the guts.

Oden is a different story. His history is not encouraging. I think he should be handled with kid's gloves during the regular season, sitting for stretches to ensure that he's primed for a deep playoff run. It's all fine and good to say that a player should stay in rhythm, but Greg Oden is not a typical player--he's a titan with very serious health concerns. Extreme care must be taken in his management, because come playoff time there's nobody that will stand up to Old Greg. Think Godzilla. Think mushroom cloud. Turn the dials on your awesome machine up to "totally" and prepare to have your face melted off and your shadow burned to the wall in a cacophony of blocks; a blizzard of put-backs; all to set to the tune of a shattering backboard.

 

End of the Bench

Rotation: Babbitt, Pendergraph, Armon, EWill

With any luck, none of these players will sniff the court this season. If any of them get run beyond Garbage Time, something terrible has happened.

The guards are looking at an unbreakable starting PG, an unshakable starting SG, and three hungry youngsters clambering to get minutes behind those starters, all of which have seniority over the rookies. I have a very high opinion of Armon Johnson based on what little I've seen, but I'm not so high on him that I'd want to see the dude in the regular rotation at the expense of Bayless or Miller. He's good, but still raw.

Elliot is mystery. All I've got to judge his potential on are some freakish stories about his jumping ability. Of the rookies, Williams' future is the least certain. It will take the complete breakdown of Bayless, Mathews and Rudy to get him on the floor. There is no expiring contract ahead of him on the depth chart, nor any doubt concerning the starter's place on the team. Furthermore, his absence on the Summer League roster denied him the opportunity to prove himself. If he doesn't blow the doors off in training camp, it should come as no surprise to see him packaged with Rudy later on this year.

Babbitt has the most hope to see time this season, but I pray he doesn't. It's not that I dislike the dude, but if he's playing that means that Nic's hurt, Dante's tanking, or Mathews busted. Those three have proven themselves to be rotation-worthy players through hard work on the defensive end and enough offensive production/potential as to not be liabilities. Babbitt's work in Summer League (believe me, I wish I had more to judge him by) was very Martellish. It took him way too long to find his touch. Even with his old pal Armon feeding him, it wasn't until the end of the competition that I saw anything noteworthy. What I saw was about what I expected: good shooting, and a desire for rebounds. That inside game he liked to throw around in college evaporated in the face of big, mean NBA-caliber talent and with it went his confidence. I think we've got a headcase on our hands. In a few years that might work itself out, but I'm not crowning him 6th man of the year any time soon.

Pendergraph was the letdown of the Summer League roster. I expected him to have polished up his game a little, especially in the foul department. I like his attitude and desire to be a presence on the floor, but if he doesn't learn some craftiness, he's just another thug. I was very disappointed to see that the dimension he's working on adding is a jab-step jumper. I must have seen three or four of those over the course of the competition, and I don't think any went down. If he adds anything to his game, it should be cleverness. Offensively, I don't think he needs to reinvent the wheel. He's a slammer and a jammer--that's it and that's fine. All the Blazers will ever need from him is to pop in, rough some fools up, jam it home on some alley-oops, and sit back down. Keep it simple. Jeff just needs to be Jeff, without so many fouls. If he can do that, he'll find some minutes. If he can't, no biggie--he's an end-of-the-bench guy. The future of the Blazers rests on other shoulders.

 

That's that. I hope y'all liked my little opinion piece. Feel free to rip my conclusions apart in the comments!

~Dogs

Comment 154 comments  |  17 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I agree

Don’t have much to add, but I totally agree with what you’re saying, especially the Bayless stuff. I think this team’s 8 man rotation can contend if healthy.

by Lamrock on Sep 1, 2010 8:56 PM PDT reply actions  

It will most likely be Oden - Camby ---- Pryz

However, a slow start in training camp would make Greg fall behind Camby. Joel ain’t seeing any significant time prior to 2011. I don’t know how he tore his patellar tendon, but they are notorious for being slow healing and any re-injury (actually in this case re-re-injury) would likely knock him out for the year, potentially ending his career since he’s at the end of his contract and no team is going to spend good money on a busted up center with a potentially career ending injury.

by odenator69 on Sep 1, 2010 10:45 PM PDT reply actions  

I don't understand....

……speaking as though you know what to expect with Pryz when your words are contradicted by both Pryz and Cho. Do you have some special knowledge? Some special insight?

Cho and Pryz both said they expect him to be back in November or December. I don’t think they would be saying that if they did not believe it to be true. Obviously, there is a chance that he may suffer a setback or a delay, but I see no reason to expect him to miss the entire season.

How well he will be able to play is another question. My understanding is that results vary; some guys are never the same, some guys make an almost complete recovery. We knoe Pryz is a warrior and will attack his rehab the same way he goes after rebounds. Cautious optimism seems advised.

by upper left corner on Sep 2, 2010 7:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

Pryzbilla the Vanilla Gorilla

was never much of a jumper anyway. I don’t know crap about injuries, but I’d guess that injuries tend to hamper people who relied on their athleticism more than folks who relied on being big and strong and smart. Pryz seems to be effective without ever getting more than a few inches off the ground.

by Z-Bones on Sep 2, 2010 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed.

However, big guys can only block out and get position if their foundation is solid. Knees are an important part of that foundation.

by upper left corner on Sep 2, 2010 9:28 AM PDT up reply actions  

I suppose that's why he added "however"

I think upper left was trying to be cordial. Probably agreed that Joel doesn’t jump much. Kind of strange to nitpick someone trying to be polite.

by Z-Bones on Sep 6, 2010 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Internet high-five.

Turn the dials on your awesome machine up to “totally” and prepare to have your face melted off

I think I just developed a man-crush on your writing style… or at least this little flourish.

"I come to you now, at the turn of the tide." -- Brandon "Gandalf" Roy, April 24th, 2010

by RedUniInLA on Sep 1, 2010 10:57 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Pryz is injury prone

I don’t know where folks get off saying he’s injury prone.

It’s because he has only made it through one season playing 82 games in 10 years. In his career he’s only averaged 51.7 games a season. Doing some quick math that is over 30 games a season missed. I can’t say for sure all those are because of injury but I’m willing to bet the vast majority are.

by recta on Sep 1, 2010 11:16 PM PDT reply actions  

Nice read, reminds me how straight up deep and talented we are.

I kinda feel bad for rookies, they aren’t going to get any run this year outside of garbage time…wait, no i don’t, they make hundreds of thousands of dollars and they will still get to sip the champagne at the end of the year

Do what it takes to get Rondo!!!

by bradheni on Sep 1, 2010 11:38 PM PDT reply actions  

Great Analysis

I agree with you except for two things:

I think you are way too hard on LMA. Yes, I was disappointed with his lack of progression but the guy is such an efficient player. I do wish and believe he could (maybe should) he was around 22-12 average. But he still is a an effective player alongside Roy and when he has the fire has taken over games (again, I wish twice as many though). I think we will see Oden and Camby together alot and it will be effective, but I think the starters should be Oden and LMA.

Second I agree stay pat is good, and think a lot of us on here are too trigger happy and antsy to shake things up. But I would pull a trade for Devin Harris or Tony Parker if presented. I love Bayless, but would take the proven abilities of Harris or Parker for our championship window now, over waiting to see if Bayless pans out

by Trail Ducker on Sep 2, 2010 2:26 AM PDT reply actions  

Let’s hope the day comes when fan’s wishes and LMA’s actual production meet in a glorious union.

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 2, 2010 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yep. I don’t think Aldridge would get 22-12. MAYBE 22 if he works harder for it, seeing how Oden being back in the line up(sooner or later) would mean some offense would run through him. As for the rebounds, again, with Oden expected back, I wouldn’t expect him to get that many. HOWEVER, as I have said many times back on the trailblazers fansite, is that Aldridge’s stats should be: 1. PPG should stay around the same, more or less. 2. There should be a SLIGHT increase in RPG. 1 at least, but if it’s even 0.5 or something like that, fine. 3 (I find this most important) GO BACK TO 1 BPG. For some odd reason, when Oden and Przy went down, Aldridge only got… what? .6 BPG? Like with number 1 and 2, with Oden back, it would be harder to get. But by setting this standard, it would mean Aldridge would have to play harder D.

by Hopman27 on Sep 4, 2010 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

3 (I find this most important) GO BACK TO 1 BPG. For some odd reason, when Oden and Przy went down, Aldridge only got… what? .6 BPG?

One possible reason is that when there’s another (better) shot blocker in the game, the offensive player is focused on eluding that big guy, which can make it easier for another defender (like LMA) to sneak in and block his shot

One thing I have noticed about LMA is that many of his “blocks” come below the shoulder level (he hacks down on the ball as the shooter is bringing it up, similar to Karl Malone. There is no separate category for “strips”, so they usually are lumped in with blocks rather than steals) LMA doesn’t rise up and block the ball very often near the top of the shooter’s release point. I suspect his goal last year was to avoid foul trouble, but that should change once Greg and Joel are healthy. I’m hoping Buck Williams will help LMA become a better post defender and defensive rebounder

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 5, 2010 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Really liked this.

I woke up too early this morning and started thinking about how BE often dwells on the negatives rather than focus on the positives that players bring to the team. I got so riled up, I determined that I must write a piece about each player focusing on what each person does well.

This is better than I would have done though. Nice read. Thanks.

by Z-Bones on Sep 2, 2010 4:46 AM PDT reply actions  

Some more thoughts on the PG situation.

Thanks for the shout out for my Bayless post.. Nice piece.

I am working on my own Fanpost looking at related issues, but here are a few reactions to the PG part of your post:

PG: Nobody is likely to accuse me of lacking enthusiasm for Bayless. However, I think saying that JB should get “most of the minutes at PG” is a bit premature. Andre Miller is a much more experienced and accomplished PG. JB is already comparable to Miller as a scorer. He is already better than Miller as a man-to man defender. He is already a significantly better 3 pt. shooter and that is an important reason for him to get minutes next to Roy.

Having said all that, JB is not yet a proven, proficient distributor. He is getting better, but he is still very inexperienced. I think last season showed two things about Bayless as a PG. 1) He struggled some when he was the only playmaker on the floor. 2) He was quite effective when he was paired with either Miller or Roy.

To me, this suggests that the PG rotation should be staggered so that Bayless gets a significant percentage of his minutes with Roy, and so that Miller gets some minutes as the QB of the second unit when Roy is on the bench. This would have three benefits:

1) I don’t think Miller’s game is best suited to playing off the ball. For those stretches when Roy wants the ball in his hands, I think it makes more sense to have either Mathews or Bayless paired with Roy. Both Mathews and Bayless are better suited for spreading the floor. Both are likely to be better at guarding the opposing point while Roy takes the lead role as distributor. How the minutes get divided between Mathews and Bayless should be based on matchups, 3 pt shooting, and whether the team needs more defense or more offense at a particular time.

2) I like the idea of having either Roy or Miller on the floor for all but a few minutes each game. That way, we can take better advantage of both guys scoring and playmaking skills. Bayless can practice driving the bus solo in situations where the team has a lead against lesser opponents.

3) Roy and Bayless can share playmaking responsibilities when they are on the floor together. Both need to learn how to be effective playing off the ball with each other. Bayless needs to use his penetration to create open opportunities for Roy, Batum, and Mathews on the perimeter. Both guys need to improve at dropping the ball to the bigs off penetration when help comes.

I think AJ has real talent and potential. However, I think like most young PGs, he is going to make a lot of mistakes initially. I think he is going to need to work on his shooting before he is ready for significant minutes. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him spend some time in the D league.

The bottom line is that I would like to see Miller start and get about 28-30 minutes per game. I would like to see Bayless get about 20 minutes per game with most coming while being paired with Roy and defending the point. Bayln talked about Bayless yesterday on WAW and said he had been working with Jerryd on improving his left hand and continuing to work on his outside shooting. He said Nate was planning to use JB both at the 1 and the 2.

 

by upper left corner on Sep 2, 2010 9:24 AM PDT reply actions   3 recs

Thanks for the shout out for my Bayless post.

We all know you’re the flag bearer for the JB parade. Credit where credit’s due.

As far as who should get the most minutes, I concur that Bayless should be getting his with the core, and Miller should fill in the blanks. I maintain that JB should get the majority of the minutes, but in big games it should be Miller out there—no doubt. As it stands, Miller is the best PG on the team. The reason I think Bayless needs to get more minutes than this obviously superior player is I want the best Bayless we can build come Playoff time.

Miller will be Miller, regardless of how many minutes he’s logging (he just needs to start or he’ll throw a fit). Bayless is still growing into his role, and needs as much time with Roy, Batum and Oden as he can get. If the post season roles around and JB hasn’t broken out, Miller’s our man, the roles are reversed again, and the game of musical chairs continues.

I also agree with your conclusion on Armon—D League would be a great thing for him. He sure as heck won’t be seeing much run otherwise. Seeing what the DL did for Patty has sold me on the program.

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 2, 2010 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

Jerryd Bayless

made six (count ’em, 1-2-3-4-5-6) threes in six games in the playoffs.

That 40% means absolutely nothing.

by Corvallis, OR on Sep 2, 2010 10:23 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Absolutely nothing?

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 2, 2010 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

OK, that's an exaggeration, but

it means very little. 20 games is probably the smallest acceptable sample for determining a players’ strengths.

The last 20 games (including playoffs), Bayless was 13-37 for 35%. Still pretty good, but in those 20 games he shot 37 threes in 19.8 MPG. That’s one three every 10 minutes. By comparison, Batum shot 1 three every 7 minutes, and the league leader in three-point % who averaged over 15 ppg, Step Curry, averaged 1 three every 7.6 minutes.

Well… what I implied in my argument was shattered by my own research in the end…

But my ORIGINAL argument holds! 6 threes in 6 games is not a whole lot.

by Corvallis, OR on Sep 2, 2010 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

Not a lot

but he took those shots and hit at 40%
that implies good shot selection, taking it when it is there and not passing up an opportunity since he stayed on the floor and Nate didn’t pull him
and most important to me, the ability to respond to playoff pressure, hitting at a slightly better clip than the regular season

"Better, not good, but better." - Herb Brooks

by DucRider on Sep 2, 2010 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

most important to me, the ability to respond to playoff pressure

Ditto. Playoff performance trumps concerns re: small sample size (i.e. 3-pt% during games in Nov-Jan when Bayless’ minutes were inconsistent)

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 2, 2010 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

If you really believe this
Playoff performance trumps concerns re: small sample size

then we should probably throw LeBron money at Derrick Brown, Sundiata Gianes, Devin Brown, or Joey Graham, all of whom averaged more than 39 points per 48 minutes in the 2010 playoffs. Derrick Brown averaged an amazing 96 per 48 min! …for a grand total of 2 points in 30 seconds of floor time.

by Marvin100 on Sep 2, 2010 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

(in Billy Joel singing voice) "I don't know why we go to extremes"

actually, I do

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 3, 2010 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

t4l already noted how ridiculous this is

But Jerryd played almost 30 mpg and all of those guys played 7 mpg or less, and there’s a huge difference between evidence of improvement and LeBron money.

Thanks for playing, strawman literalist

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Sep 4, 2010 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

fair enough, but he did play well in the playoffs overall too.

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Sep 5, 2010 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

We all understand that Bayless' improved 3-pt shooting percentage after the all-star break was a small sample size

And that his critics aren’t going to be convinced until more data is available and the trend is proven

But that shouldn’t minimize the young man’s accomplishment, especially considering that he was thrust into the backup PG role after the Camby deal, and (for the most part) he was playing alongside two wing players (Rudy, Marty) who were struggling with their own 3-pt accuracy during the same time period

Outside shooting is a skill that can be improved with reps, this has been seen with young NBA players for decades. Bayno said they’ve continued to work on it during the summer. Rather than predict a regression to below 35% from behind the arc, I expect Jerryd to repeat his 37-38% accuracy—especially if he’s playing alongside better offensive players (which should lead to more wide-open opportunities)

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 5, 2010 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Gotcha

Sometimes a “full head of steam” leads to disaster for Jerryd, but I can overlook aggressive mistakes a lot easier that when the player doesn’t give an effort or isn’t ever willing to take risks. I expect Bayless’ potential will be “reined in” and he’ll eventually learn how to change his pace during penetration and then he’ll really mess with NBA defenders (like Roy and Miller already can)

Bayno said they were working on Jerryd’s left hand, and that he’s now added a “floater” to his arsenal. I can’t wait to see it

The original comment that you responded to (“playoff performance trumps small sample size”) wasn’t intended to be an axiom to be applied to every situation. What I meant is that I will be more excited about a player who “shows up” in the post season than one who looks overwhelmed. Mentally tough players tend to bring home the hardware in June, and even though these post season sample sizes are small, the players only get a chance to perform under the really bright lights once a year.

So, I treat it like a final exam.

By my observation Bayless passed with flying colors—even though he made a few aggressive mistakes against the Suns—he didn’t show any signs of wilting under pressure. Quite the contrary. That bodes well for his future in Portland, or at least I think it should

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 5, 2010 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bayno's report was music to my ears

Jerryd really needs to work on his left hand. If he was as good going left as he is going right, he would get a lot fewer shots blocked.

Same with the floater. Bayless with a reliable floater would be very tough to stop.

The other thing he needs to work on, of course, is getting the ball to the bigs when the help comes. A nice bounce pass or a nice lob to GO for the jam would really thrill me. We saw it last year, we just didn’t see it often enough. Roy could use some work in this area too.

by upper left corner on Sep 6, 2010 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

We saw it last year, we just didn’t see it often enough. Roy could use some work in this area too.

Actually, I remember seeing it (dishing to big men near the basket) more from Bayless than from Roy. Brandon’s favorite “bail out” is to pass the ball to the shooter in the strong-side corner, he doesn’t seem to be able to see or recognize open teammates near the basket when he starts his move. (This observation argues against the idea of #7 being a “PG” in the Blazer’s offense for any significant amount of time)

As you said, Jerryd has shown this ability, and we need to see more of it. I was encouraged during the few times I saw Bayless dish or lob the ball to big men last season, this means he doesn’t have tunnel vision on the rim, and he’s making strides towards becoming more of a distributor.

I still expect that he’ll be asked to play a dual role of backup PG and off-the-bench scorer (as Bayno intimated) and this will require Jerryd to learn how to set up his teammates and well as “get his own” depending on what the defense “gives” him with each possession. This is not an easy lesson for any young guard to learn, but he’s got one of the best in the business to watch on a nightly basis in #24

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 6, 2010 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

He did shoot 38% for the two months after the All-Star break

That is certainly more than just six playoff games. You are correct that it is still a pretty small sample, although I think saying it means “nothing” is overstating the case. Whether it is a random fluctuation or an emerging trend is unclear.

We do know that Bayless was a good shooter in HS, and that he shot 40% from 3 in college, so it wouldn’t be surprising to see him improve to somewhere near that level.

by upper left corner on Sep 2, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

Good thoughts

PF is the only section you lost me on. While some fans are not down with Aldridge as the future PF, I don’t see too much of an indication that the Blazers brass is thinking the same way. He is the starter for now and at least the near future.
One other small thing was the mention of Matthews not getting enough minutes. That will be a bit of an issue with Miller still a Blazer but if Bayless shows that he can be reliable throughout the year, I would wager that the Blazers jetison Miller either via a trade or not picking up his contract. This would leave them with a wing rotation of Roy, Bayless, Matthews, And Batum with DC picking up leftovers at the SF and PF postitions next year.

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on Sep 2, 2010 10:31 AM PDT via mobile reply actions  

Big thumbs up for this thread

so much better than “The (Rudy) Lineup” main page Frankenstein monster that Dave breathed life into, the day before yesterday

Dream PF Rotation: Camby, LMA, Cunningham

Another added benefit of this would be to add LMA’s scoring punch to the bench. His minutes shouldn’t be greatly reduced, which call for some creative rotation-staggering from the coaching staff, which leads me to ULC’s take

To me, this suggests that the PG rotation should be staggered so that Bayless gets a significant percentage of his minutes with Roy, and so that Miller gets some minutes as the QB of the second unit when Roy is on the bench.

Completely agree. More Bayless-Roy backcourt, please. (Miller and Matthews would be a better 1-2 combo than Jerryd-Wesley, as well) Hopefully the coaching staff is on this same direction re: staggering the rotations, without ruffling anyone’s feathers.

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 2, 2010 10:41 AM PDT reply actions  

Nice suggestion regarding Camby-LMA

Seems to me that staggering the rotations of the PF position similar to the PG rotation would give us much more balanced scoring and playmaking at all times.

1st shift: RAMBO

2nd shift: Oden, Camby, Batum/Mathews, Roy and Bayless

3rd shift: Miller, Mathews, Cunningham, LMA, Camby or Miller, Bayless, Mathews, LMA, Camby

Basically, we would have either Miller or Roy on the floor most of the time, and we would have either Oden or LMA on the floor most of the time. I think this would help balance out the scoring touches for Miller and Roy and the touches for Oden and LMA.

Besides, I want to see Camby feed Oden in from the high post. I think it could be very tough to defend. I also want to see Camby as a weakside shot blocker next to Oden. Sort of like a road crew putting up a sign that says, “Lane Closed.”

by upper left corner on Sep 4, 2010 8:04 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Besides, I want to see Camby feed Oden in from the high post. I think it could be very tough to defend.

I want to see this so bad! Do you think if I wrote enough letters, the NBA would agree to start a month early?

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 4, 2010 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree so freaking hard, dude

Sub LMA and Miller early, PLEASE.

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Sep 4, 2010 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Nice post, but...

1) From what I saw of AJ in the SL, the dude knows how to run a team. It seems to me that he is the second best pure point guard on the team. He also is big, and looks to be a very capable defender. In other words, I think Nate is really going to like this kid, and give him some run as the second PG off the bench. I’m thinking Dre 30, AJ 12, JB 6.

2) Which means Bayless moves more to the backup 2 slot, than the backup 1 slot. Given Matthews defensive abilites, I think he will also become a Nate fave. In short, I expect Bayless to not be very happy, as he may find himself behind two more capable defenders… However, his ability to play 1 and 2, and his great ability as the #1 option in garbage time, should give him ~15 mpg average, with a few games breaking into 20 ppg. Batum may guard opposing two’s, but I don’t see him on the court as are only 2 very often, if at all. I really hope that we’re able to rest BRoy quite a bit, especially early and late in the regular season. I’m thinking Broy 29/Matthews 10/ Bayless 9

3) Keep Batum here. He can of course guard any 1-2-3, but I expect Nate to slot him exclusively in the 3 for offensive purposes… Matthews should also get time here, and Dante mostly mop-up blowout time. Maybe a 24/18/6 kind of split, over the course of a season?

4) LMA should get 30 or so here, with the rest doled out to Camby, Pendy, Dante based on matchups and need. I see Camby getting 12 or so here, with Pendy and Dante splitting 6. (Sorry guys, you’re just not talented enough to warrant more crunch time, but we need you in blowouts so we can rest the key guys.)

5) GO should have an ever increasing work load, particularly while Pryz is out. For the first few months, I see Camby getting 15-20 mpg here, with GO getting 28-33. I would, however, rest GO perhaps 1 game every 2 weeks, particularly when facing running teams like Pheonix, NY and Golden State… When Pryz comes back, he should gradually reduce both Camby and GO’s minutes, so they are fresher for the playoffs.

Unless Nate has to wildly juggle lineups because of injuries again, the focus should be on integrating Oden and Batum into a more varied offense, and developing the core 8 or 9 man playoff rotation. I do hope this year brings the end to Nate’s “two units” experiment, and we begin to focus on championship success.

These guys are definites for the playoff rotation: Dre, Roy, Batum, LMA, GO (starters). And Camby should have most of the remaining minutes at both the 4 and 5 in the playoffs. Wes Matthews, Bayless, and I think AJ will round out the 9 man playoff rotation. (Pryz and Dante with minor roles only if big guys are in foul trouble.)

by Visionary2 on Sep 2, 2010 10:44 AM PDT reply actions   2 recs

From what I saw of AJ in the SL, the dude knows how to run a team. It seems to me that he is the second best pure point guard on the team. He also is big, and looks to be a very capable defender. In other words, I think Nate is really going to like this kid, and give him some run as the second PG off the bench.

I agree re: AJ’s potential, but Portland is in win now mode and Nate is typically tough on rookie PGs. It’s a big jump from the WAC to the NBA and I expect AJ to spend some time in the D-League playing regularly against his peers. If Miller ever goes down, the potential of Bayless-Johnson PG combo will be put to the acid test. I’m not lookig forward to this possibility in March-April, here’s hoping the “health vampire” will stay tucked away in his coffin during daylight hours

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 2, 2010 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions  

HA!

“Health Vampire”. Too true.

If there is such a beast, Dre’s got a garlic tuxedo.

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 2, 2010 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

tominhawaii coined the term

he was so impressed with Andre’s ability to never miss any games that he suggested that Miller was sucking the health out of his teammates, last season (hence, the injury curse)

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 2, 2010 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

If that’s the case, he must have had a straw hooked up to Greg’s knee. I can only hope he got his fill last season.

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 2, 2010 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm all about Armon too, but...

I think he’s still got some kinks to work out before he’s a better PG (for the Blazers) than Jerryd.

Even if you don’t like the small sample size of the Playoffs, JB is obviously a better shooter than Armon. Right now, that’s what is needed from that position. When Miller moves on there will be room for a bruiser like AJ but until then, with the rotation you’re proposing, that’s only six minutes of three point shooting from the PG position. Maybe the others will pick up the slack, but I’d rather see Roy getting to the hoop than jacking up treys.

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 2, 2010 6:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Its possible, but I doubt it.....
1) From what I saw of AJ in the SL, the dude knows how to run a team. It seems to me that he is the second best pure point guard on the team. He also is big, and looks to be a very capable defender. In other words, I think Nate is really going to like this kid, and give him some run as the second PG off the bench. I’m thinking Dre 30, AJ 12, JB 6.

2) Which means Bayless moves more to the backup 2 slot, than the backup 1 slot. Given Matthews defensive abilites, I think he will also become a Nate fave. In short, I expect Bayless to not be very happy, as he may find himself behind two more capable defenders…

Nate playing a rookie with only 2 years of experience in the WAC as his #2 PG? A guy who shot 24% from the college 3 pt line? I think the enthusiasm for AJ, based on six SL games, is pretty premature. He showed he is a nice prospect against B-level competition.

He is going to make plenty of mistakes when he gets on the floor with the big boys. His rookie TOs aren’t likely to endear him to Nate. His inability to shoot from beyond 15 ft. means his defender is going to be able to sag off him with impunity. He is likely to suffer from the same decision making issues every young PG faces when moving to the NBA.

Your assumption that both Mathews and AJ are better defenders than Bayless is pretty debatable. Mathews is clearly a better defender against 2 guards because of his size and reach, but many match-ups and situations are going to call for someone who can guard smaller quicker PGs. I think the jury is very much out on who is the better defender against these guys. Bayless was far more effective against Nash and Dragic than Webster, and I see Mathews as more like Webster.

AJ looked good defending SL scrubs, but he didn’t face a lot of NBA level talent. He may prove to be a better man-to-man defender than Bayless, but that remains to be demonstrated. In addition, AJ is likely to suffer some adjustment difficulties as a team defender. Team defense is very much about recognition and decision making. Guys have to recognize what the offense is going to do, almost before they do it, and understand their defensive rotations almost with out thinking about it. It takes time.

by upper left corner on Sep 4, 2010 8:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

FWIW, I'm not one of those people who's overly excited about AJ

but, reportedly, he very nearly shut down John Wall during our pick-up game against WAS. As a man-to-man defender, that should make him more than capable of defending second string NBA points, and probably better than Bayless, who often gets out-smarted on defense (but he’s getting a lot better, and will probably become a pretty good PG defender, aided by his quickness). Your point on team defense may, and probably does, still apply (though we haven’t really seen much of this out of Armon)

Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!

by HailOden! on Sep 5, 2010 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm just saying it is too soon to draw any reliable conclusions

It is interesting, you say you heard,

reportedly, he very nearly shut down John Wall during our pick-up game

I recall hearing “he held his own.” Different statements, different meanings. He looks good, and he may prove to be the best young PG defender this side of Rondo. I’m just saying nothing has been proven yet.

Given a choice between evaluating a player based on six SL games, or six playoff games against Nash and Dragic, I know which one I am going to choose. I just find it amazing how Ben and Dave and the media group all raved about AJ. It seemed disproportionate to the stage on which he performed and the competition he faced.

I hope all the enthusiasm proves well founded. PG defense has been one of my biggest concerns for years and years. I also hope AJ is more ready on the offensive end, it would be great to have two young talented PGs.

by upper left corner on Sep 6, 2010 8:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

I haven't been reading BE for long, but...

I remember Ben and Dave talking up Batum before everyone here got on the Nicolas bandwagon. And then Dave and Ben raved about how much better Oden was looking (than his previous season) prior to last season’s opener. I’m sure they make mistakes. They’re only human. But I’m starting to trust them a little when they get really excited about someone.

I do agree with your suspicion that AJ won’t get a whole lot of playing time. Not many rookies are able to make an impact in the league right away. And Nate isn’t the kind of guy that likes to take chances. I’d guess even our dear BE editors, no matter how excited they are, would probably start the season off with Miller and Bayless. AJ will have plenty of time to work himself into the NBA.

by Z-Bones on Sep 6, 2010 5:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

there's a learning curve for Johnson

Just like there was for Jarrett Jack, just like there was for Bayless himself

I was impressed with AJ at summer league. (I wouldn’t say he “very nearly shut down” Wall but Armon was very competitive against the consensus #1 pick.) AJ was a solid pick in the 2nd round, and he could turn into a spectacular choice in years to come. But there are a few reasons why I wouldn’t project AJ to be in the Blazer’s regular rotation

The reason Johnson fell to #34 was because of his jumpshot. From watching him in Vegas his form isn’t broke, but by his own admission he needs to gain more confidence in his outside shot. I’m sure he’s been working on it diligently this summer. But shooting in a gym against air is different than being confident in knocking down that open shot in game competition, which leads me to point #2

Armon has played 2 years in the WAC. and the jump from that level of competition can’t be overlooked. There have been some very good players in the past who have come out of the WAC (or whatever it was called, back in the day) so that gives me hope for Babbitt and Johnson, but to expect Armon to step into to an NBA rotation at this point of his career is over-estimating his abilities and experience. Basically, if Armon plays that much in Portland this season, that means something has gone seriously wrong with Miller or Bayless, and that would not be a positive for Portland. AJ is a failsafe plan, and the Blazers are in win now mode, not “develop the rookies during the regular season”

(I wouldn’t mind seeing the Blazers add another veteran PG to the roster to make the failsafe more watertight, in case Andre’s string of injury-free games comes to an abrupt end, this spring.)

I also wouldn’t mind hearing that Johnson (and Williams) are being sent to the D-League to play against their peers for part of this coming season. Practices are rare after the regular season starts, and even though they can play one-on-one against each other, and work out with assistant coaches before games, they’re going to need some live game action, and that’s unlikely to happen for the Blazers, unless the unthinkable happens (like last year…)

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 6, 2010 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Should have read this before posting above. Rec

Seems pretty spot on. It’s just so tough to make an impact as a rookie on a pretty solid team like Portland. And then with a very cautious coach…

by Z-Bones on Sep 6, 2010 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

AJ has poise and PG skills...

When AJ has the ball, I’m not concerned. He’s calm, steady, has excellent vision, and thinks pass first (as he should, with his outside shot).

I believe those are the essential traits of an NBA pg. (Yes, in this decade, one who can hit from outside has been added to the ideal PG trait, but NONE of the Blazer’s PG’s can hit from outside, so we just have to adjust.)

I know you and 24l are the huge Bayless honks here, so I don’t expect to change your mind, but I don’t believe you can honestly say that JB has the typical NBA PG skill set… In short, Miller and AJ look like the prototypical 1 to me. And I see advantages in staying with a PG rotation that thinks pass first.

Bayless is a short quick combo guard with a nice nose for the rim. When our offense is stalling, and nobody can hit, absolutely insert JB and tell him to go to the hole. But most nights, I expect us to have a lead that Nate will want to defend. And I think he’ll end up going with players that are more dependable and controlled offensively, and stronger defensively.

That means that AJ and Wes could very well get more significant minutes than Jerryd.

They’re very different players, for sure, and hopefully this variety of skill sets will allow Nate to mix and match them against the opponent, and game situation…

(Phew, made it through a whole post without bashing Nate! That was tough… But I guess my Fire Nate Fast is working! ;-)

by Visionary2 on Sep 7, 2010 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

There is considerable difference of opinion about what we need next to Roy.

You like “pass first.” This is the traditional PG skill-set. When somebody strays from that it doesn’t look right to you.

I like the idea of having a PG who has excellent penetration skills. I think it puts tremendous pressure on the opposing defense to have to constantly be trying to stop the ball. I also see getting to the free throw line as a huge part of the game. Not only is it easy points compared to trying to make jumpers, foul trouble for the opposing team is a huge weapon that can often send their best players to the bench or force them to be much less aggressive.

I also disagree with your assessment of Bayless as a scorer. I think you are thinking about what he was rather than what he will become. I see potential precisely because I think he is going to be a penetrator and a shooter. We need someone who is a legitimate 3 pt threat to spread the floor for Roy and Oden. Bayless wasn’t there yet last year, but his 38% after the break would be great f he could sustain it for a whole season. I think AJ the chances of AJ becoming that kind of a shooter are much lower, he only shot 24% from the college 3 pt line.

We need playmaking, but it doesn’t have to all come from our PG. Roy and Bayless each have an Assist % around 22-23% and relatively low TO%. Why can’t they share the playmaking responsibilities when Miller isn’t on the floor?

To me, the question with Bayless is decision making skills. When Bayless was a three time Player of the Year in Arizona and a McDonald’s All American, he was so much better than everybody on the floor it was normal for him to look to score. He averaged 6 assists per game which shows he wasn’t a ball-hog, but he was very dominant.

Now, he is trying to figure out how to play with the big boys. Should he be aggressive and trying to score? Or should he be trying to create for teammates? Finding that balance is difficult for most young, scoring type PGs in the NBA. It is doubly difficult coming into the league at 19, having played his one year at UA out of position.

Will he figure it out? How long will it take? Can the team afford to give him that much time? I don’t know the answers to any of these questions. I do think that the team seems to agree with my assessment that he should enough progress last year that it makes sense for him to be given a chance to show what he can do this year. This season is clearly make-it or break-it for Jerryd.

Your gushing evaluation of AJ seems premature, IMO. Unlike last year when Bayless was given a team that didn’t have a single guy with more than a handful of games of NBA experience, and a team where his SGs shot a collective 3-28. This year’s SL team had superior talent and experience compared to most of the teams they played. As I said above, which six games would you rather use as a yardstick: six games against non-NBA players, or six playoff games against Nash and Dragic?

by upper left corner on Sep 7, 2010 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm very curious about AJ's shooting woes.

He said that he had a lot on his mind in Nevada, and I’d like to know what he was getting at. Apparently, the coaches thought his form looked better than his numbers, so there might be something to that. Also, in SL he was usually the one to jack up the prayer from half court when time ran out. If that’s typical for him, the numbers will look even worse. Furthermore, he had his old pal Luke Babbitt waiting in the wings to bury the treys.

I ain’t trying to say that Armon is suddenly going to start knocking down NBA threes at will, but I do think the numbers are only telling part of the story. If he applies himself this season, we might witness a leap.

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 7, 2010 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

I should have predicted a ULC defense of Bayless in 3..2..1...

No surprise, ULC, no surprise… Nothing new, either…

I’ve watched Bayless intently over the last few years. I’ve seen somebody who can attack the hole for his own gain. I’ve seen him gain confidence in his outside shot (whether that confidence is warranted or not, and therefore whether that is a good thing or not is debatable.) That’s it for the positive side.

On the negative side, I see sporadic, foul-plagued defense, highlighted with stupid fouls far away from the basket. I saw him get blocked more often while driving the lane last year, and I noticed that he doesn’t get as many calls as he used to when he collapses on the floor after another drive is stuffed. He is hesitant with the ball, and doesn’t seem to know how to hit a roller off a pick, or to make an entry pass.

While I offer an observation that we seem to have two tradtional PG’s now (AJ, AM) you chose to ignore his shortcomings in a traditional PG role that are glaringly obvious: he is not under control, in fact is out of control (emotionally and) on drives more than he is under control. He also is a shoot first guard who, like all Blazers but Miller, has no clue how to make a post entry pass. Most of his passes occur when he has exhausted all hope of getting a shot, typically while he is in the air, which generates a turnover more often than an assist.

And while my “gushing” (really, this is gushing?)

AJ has poise and PG skills… When AJ has the ball, I’m not concerned. He’s calm, steady, has excellent vision, and thinks pass first (as he should, with his outside shot).

may be premature, it is based on an observation of his on-court play. (Rather than your technique of using cherry-picked stats to back up your pre-conceptions.) In short, AJ has already passed my eyeball test on what a point guard should look like. JB hasn’t.

The only thing I can agree with you on is that this season is make or break for JB… While I hope he breaks out, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see him moved at the deadline, giving the PGotF to AJ…

by Visionary2 on Sep 7, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

He also is a shoot first guard who, like all Blazers but Miller, has no clue how to make a post entry pass

Marcus Camby says “hi”

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 8, 2010 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

also Rudy, but hey

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Sep 8, 2010 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

if you like the way he leans way over to his right and skips the entry pass along the baseline with extra spin on it

then yeah (as Mike Rice would say) “he can do that”

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 8, 2010 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

Unlike last year when Bayless was given a team that didn’t have a single guy with more than a handful of games of NBA experience, and a team where his SGs shot a collective 3-28.

Did you have to remind me? I just threw up in my mouth again with the memory of that ’09 Vegas roster (outside of Pendy, Ferno, Rex and Pooh)

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 7, 2010 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

NONE of the Blazer’s PG’s can hit from outside

C’mon now, you can’t compare Jerryd to Andre in this department. Bayless has made strides in this area and I find your lack of faith re: his 2nd half improvement …disturbing

Johnson might become as good of a shooter as Bayless is now in 2 years, if he works on his shot like Jerryd has. But Rex was already better as a collegian, so there’s no guarantee

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 7, 2010 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

But most nights, I expect us to have a lead that Nate will want to defend. And I think he’ll end up going with players that are more dependable and controlled offensively, and stronger defensively.

That means that AJ and Wes could very well get more significant minutes than Jerryd

If this happens you’ll get serious propos for predicting it, but I’d say the odds are very strong that it will be Miller and Roy protecting leads down the stretch, and Roy-Matthews-Batum when the team needs to spread the floor and let Roy put on his superman cape

Johnson is an injury replacement. I do like Armon’s upside for the future, a lot. But he’s a rookie who hasn’t had any big-time college experience playing for a head coach who snacks on young PGs for lunch

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 7, 2010 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

(Phew, made it through a whole post without bashing Nate! That was tough… But I guess my Fire Nate Fast is working! ;-)

I hope you won’t bash Nate if he doesn’t play AJ much, this year. Because I think he’ll be giving you a lot of opportunities to…

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 7, 2010 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm just surprised...

Nobody has commented yet on the double-meaning of my Fire Nast Fast!

by Visionary2 on Sep 7, 2010 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

nasty

you’re a mean one, Mr. double entendre

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 8, 2010 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cunningham is an undersized 4, not a 3.

He can’t dribble or do much to create his own shot, never hit a 3-pter in college (did he hit one in summer league?); he can help in certain matchups due to hustle and court-smarts, but he’s very limited.

It’s impossible to imagine him matched up at PF with someone like Boozer or Al Jefferson no matter how “ripped” DC looks.

Overestimating DC’s worth plus the bizarre idea of starting Camby over Lamarcus renders the entire analysis suspect, driven by exaggeration and hyperbole rather than straight-up utilitariarism.

ignacio

by ignacio on Sep 2, 2010 3:23 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

He can’t dribble or do much to create his own shot, never hit a 3-pter in college (did he hit one in summer league?);

No, they had Dante working on his penetration during summer league. He came out of a college system (‘Nova) where he played center in a zone, so his post moves are undeveloped. He’s got great footwork on his pick and pop fundamentals, and I’d be surprised if Portland didn’t have him working on his corner trey, but perhaps they decided not to trot it out at Vegas because he was more of a focal point in the summer league team’s offense and not an outlet shooter like he’ll be playing with the regulars

Straight up utilitarianism is unimaginative and repetitive. The reason this fanpost was rec-ced up is because it combined out of the box thinking with some witty writing.

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 2, 2010 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, you're right

By the age of 23, folks are set in stone. No chance to improve or change at that advanced age. It’s never happened. Hardening of the arteries has already set in. It’s a fact!

I was born in '52, and I believe in #52. Hang in there, GO.
You too, Przy: everyone knows you're the heart & soul of the Blazers.

by hurryup09 on Sep 3, 2010 1:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

No, he'll improve--notice I didn't say he'll never develop a three point shot--but they don't become different players altogether.

I’d like to hear of even ONE player who developed handles and/or penetration ability after turning 23 .

by Marvin100 on Sep 3, 2010 7:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think what you're failing to consider here

is environment. Why would you try to teach a 26 year old player a new facet to his game? If he’s still in the league then he does what he does well enough and you plan around that. If they don’t already have a functional skill set at that age they’re probably not playing pro anymore.

The perceptions of a person’s skill curve is exaggerated to the extreme in professional sports due to the toll it takes the body. We look at Juwan Howard and are amazed he’s still in the game. If he were in the different career, age 37 would be considered barely into his prime earning years. Everything before that point would have been his “development years”. Is there any career outside of sports where we would artificially cut off the vast majority of a person’s career development timeline?

As a side note: At age 23, the human brain hasn’t even finished its growth process. That doesn’t stop until about age 25.

by Decaf on Sep 3, 2010 8:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

I only failed to consider environment because I failed to consider ANY causes.

I’m speaking about a result, a fact. I’m not speculating on the causes at all, nor will I.

What I’m saying is that players simply do not develop handles after 21 or so in the NBA. If I’m wrong, I’d love to hear the examples—I’m genuinely stumped trying to come up with one.

Jump shots can be refined and improved, but handles, to me, are like fastballs—if you don’t have the heat when you’re young, you’re never going to have it. If you start out with the heat and then age, you may develop a crafty off-speed pitch. Many penetrators become able mid-range or three-point shooters. The reverse just isn’t true, to the best of my knowledge.

by Marvin100 on Sep 4, 2010 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

Admittedly, players who developed a jumpshot after turning pro come to mind more readily

E.g., Karl Malone. But I’m sure there have been numerous players who greatly improved their ballhandling and ability to penetrate after entering the NBA. It’s just that, unlike shooting percentage or range, that’s harder to quantify statistically.

But returning to your thesis that 23-year-old athletes are somehow set in stone…there’s plenty of examples of that syndrome. Martell Webster comes to mind. He entered the league right out of high school as a jumpshooting specialist, and while he improved in some areas, he’s still essentially the same player today.

The problem, I think, is that players naturally tend to want to work on their strengths, not their weaknesses. It takes maturity & discipline to focus on what you’re NOT good at. But I think Dante Cunningham is exactly the type of player who would accept that challenge. He’s an impressive young guy.

The real question in Dante’s case is whether the coaching staff would WANT him to focus his time & energy on improving his ballhandling & ability to penetrate. They might have a different view of how he should develop, of what niche he should fit.

I was born in '52, and I believe in #52. Hang in there, GO.
You too, Przy: everyone knows you're the heart & soul of the Blazers.

by hurryup09 on Sep 3, 2010 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

The real question in Dante’s case is whether the coaching staff would WANT him to focus his time & energy on improving his ballhandling & ability to penetrate. They might have a different view of how he should develop, of what niche he should fit.

Not a question. They did, and he showed off some of his new-found handles in Vegas

He’s not a natural at it, but then, neither was Travis

I just hope DC’s been shooting hundreds of corner 3 pointers every day, this summer

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 3, 2010 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

I dunno about having Dante become a corner 3-point guy

One of Dante’s strengths is his nose for the ball. In particular, he has a knack for offensive rebounding. Sticking him in the corner would take a lot of that away.

Right away, I think of Cliff Robinson—a talented, promising small forward who discovered the 3-point shot, fell in love with it, and rarely got his hands dirty thereafter.

I was born in '52, and I believe in #52. Hang in there, GO.
You too, Przy: everyone knows you're the heart & soul of the Blazers.

by hurryup09 on Sep 3, 2010 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

out of area rebounding

Dante has the ability to see the arc of the ball on it’s way to the basket and get himself into position to be where the rebound is going. (He can do this from the corner as well as on the wing or out top) If he can knock down the corner trey, he can play more for Nate. I don’t worry about Cunningham becoming a perimeter floater like Cliffy or ‘Sheed. He doesn’t shrink from contact. I’ve seen him box out 250+lb centers and secure rebounds, he uses good fundamentals and has low center-of-gravity leverage

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 3, 2010 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Dante is one of those players that you just feel comfortable with, kind of like a poor man’s version of what Kevin Love is doing for team USA. It’s easy to trust him to play hard, make good decisions, and make good things happen, and anytime you can get that from a 9th or 10th rotation guy that’s awesome.

I think the development of his handles is not designed to make him any sort of ball handler/perimeter player or what have you (not that anyone is necessarily implying such a thing), but to give him the ability to compliment his midrange jumpshooting game. He’s a face-up guy as it is…throw in the ability to make a one or two dribble attack to the basket and you have a dual-threat midrange player at the backup PF position. This will increase the effectiveness of his pump fake as well, as he’ll be able to punish those who fall for it…forcing them to think twice before contesting his next jumper.

by sammymohawk on Sep 3, 2010 7:29 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

Ballhandling

is a skill. And the more skills you have as a player, the better. But it also seems like you only need so many ball handlers on the floor. If you can have an effective one or two dribbles, you can do an awful lot. I think a lot of players make the mistake of over dribbling actually. If you’re not the primary ball handler, then “making a move” doesn’t usually need to involve more than a few dribbles. If you’re making more than one move and you’re not the primary ball handler or even close to the primary scorer, you’ll probably earn a quick trip to the bench.

by Z-Bones on Sep 6, 2010 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Couldn't agree more--but threes in this league, at least ones who see significant floor time, MUST be able to go to the rock.

And Dante’s too small to be a legit four.

My argument is really just that Dante’s destined to be a backup, and maybe even out of the league before too long, since most teams prefer to keep backups they think might one day have the skills to start.

by Marvin100 on Sep 9, 2010 1:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

Dante Cunningham's standing reach, 8'10.5", is perfect ...

fine for a modern-day pick-and-pop 4 — which is exactly what he is as a player — such as Udonis Haslem (8’11" standing reach), Brandon Bass (8’10.5" standing reach), et cetera.

I mean, look, there’s nothing wrong with being a pure pick-and-pop 4; yet, a lot of people seemingly don’t want to concede that Cunningham, 23, is clearly in that mold and not remotely close to being anything else. In the 2010 NBA Draft, Patrick Patterson (8’11" standing reach) was the most prototypical pick-and-pop 4 available.

Cunningham isn’t an undersized 4, a future stretch 4, nor a guy who can play out of position at the 3 or 5 effectively; rather, he’s a pure pick-and-pop 4. I figure that’s why the team’s basketball operations department decided to draft him in the first place, as his skill set seemingly fits the criteria for what Nate McMillan — for better or worse — wants out of that position.

Heck, if the guys in the basketball operations department had wanted a 4/3 hybrid instead of a pure pick-and-pop 4, they’d’ve instead picked someone such as DaJuan Summers or Derrick Brown — who each suck — in lieu of Cunningham.

Anyhow, I’m glad that Cunningham is a Blazer instead of Tyler Hansbrough — who then GM Kevin Pritchard allegedly tried to trade up for last year — because he fills that 10th/11th man role both cheaper and more effectively than the overhyped Beaker look-alike/Darius Songaila 2.0 bum would’ve done here.

Of course, taking Victor Claver over a fellow foreigner who’d’ve made an immediate impact (e.g., Omri Casspi) — or instead trading out of the first-round altogether for future draft assets — and passing over DeJuan Blair for Jeff Pendergraph were both ill-advised moves; thus, the fact that Cunningham was the only worthwhile grab from the ’09 NBA Draft gives it a C-/D+ grade.

by AK1984 on Sep 9, 2010 4:21 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Dante C over Hansbrough? I'm with you.

But I think it’s Dante’s defensive ability that makes him a liability at the four. He’s prime for pick & pop, indeed, but we have one of those, a very good one. I’m also not sure Dante’s a good enough rebounder for the four, but hey.

And in the “new four” Chris Bosh mold, handles are a must—watch Bosh make beefy opponents pay by driving right around them.

by Marvin100 on Sep 9, 2010 4:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

He’s prime for pick & pop, indeed, but we have one of those, a very good one. I’m also not sure Dante’s a good enough rebounder for the four,

LMA is the starting 4, that may remain for the next 10 years, but it’s not a given

If Cunningham started and played the same minutes as LMA, I strongly suspect he would out rebound #12. (Better fundamentals, stronger desire…I am not advocating DC to be the starting PF, Camby would be a better choice once the other centers are healthy)

As things stand right now, DC is an ideal PF to play against smaller lineups, which the Blazers are certain to face during the regular season. He was working on his ballhandling in Vegas, and he’s far from a finished product so I’d be hesitant to pigeon-hole him to any one role at this time. He can defend physical SFs (probably better than any other Blazer) so that makes him a potential 3/4, regardless of how he’s used on offense.

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 9, 2010 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

the overhyped Beaker look-alike/Darius Songaila 2.0 bum

rec

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 9, 2010 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with your assessment of Dante's rebounding gifts

But I disagree when you say that he’d be as well-positioned to snag offensive rebounds from the deep corner as from the wing or out top.

Again, I’m not a big fan of positioning talented offensive rebounders like Dante Cunningham beyond the 3-point line. Channing Frye, sure: let him fire away out there. He’s tall, but rebounding comes about as naturally to him as swimming does to my housecat.

I was born in '52, and I believe in #52. Hang in there, GO.
You too, Przy: everyone knows you're the heart & soul of the Blazers.

by hurryup09 on Sep 3, 2010 9:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think DC would be better than most, rebounding from the corner

Most of his shots are going to come from the elbow-wing area, 15-17 feet. But if he can knock down the corner three in transition or on ISOs he’ll be more valuable, especially at SF in Nate’s system

there’s no reason he can’t do both, as needed

It can be tricky to box out active players from the corners. I remember Bobby Gross used to take a “banana” route out-of-bounds along the baseline and come in underneath the backboard, establish inside position then tip the ball in quickly before the big guys could get their hands on it. Dante may be able to something like this on possessions where he’s spotting up along the baseline

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 4, 2010 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Dante Cunningham isn't a 3 in any way, shape, or form.

The dude is a pick-and-pop 4, end of story, Keep dreaming, though.

by AK1984 on Sep 5, 2010 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

you are who you can defend

can Dante defend the more physical SFs in the NBA? Yes

So, Cunningham will occasionally be in Portland’s lineup as a 3, especially if Nic and Wesley are put into early foul trouble by the opposing SF

Is all that you think about when evaluating a player is what he can do on offense? This seems to be a reoccurring theme (“Matthews will never be a SG in Nate’s system” etc) There is another end of the floor and it’s a pretty important part of the game…

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 5, 2010 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

The "you are who you can defend" cliché is a fallacy, since ...

offensive schemes are key to each team’s idenity. The only way that Dante Cunningham can become an effective 4/3 — so that he can be a pick-and-pop power forward on offense and guard small forwards on defense — is alongside a 3/4 type guy at the other forward spot who can spread the floor, with Luke Babbitt being the lone guy currently on the Portland Trail Blazers who can fill that role.

For whatever reason, it’s like you keep viewing offensive roles as if the game is stuck in the early-‘80s and don’t account for the way in which the game has changed dramatically during the past three decades. In fact, here’s a recent comment of mine wherein I adress this very issue.

“In the main page threads and fan posts, I often like the back-and-forth [conversations] between two4larue and BlazerFanSince1970. Since they’re both long-time basketball fans, it’s interesting to see their perspective on things. Yet, having watched the sport way back into the ‘70s can sometimes be a detriment, with one example being t4l’s suggestion of playing Dante Cunningham at the 3. This isn’t the early-1980s — which is around when the three-point line was introduced — when someone such as Calvin Natt can start at small forward.

As it was, in 1980-1981, 1981-1982,1982-1983, and 1983-1984 — which are the four seasons that Natt played extensively for Portland at the 3 — Natt hit a combined total of 11 for 53 from beyond the arc. Heck, the Trail Blazers itself shot only 16.9%, 20.7%, 23.3%, and 19.4% from downtown as a team in those seasons, respectively. It was a different era, pure and simple. In today’s game, Natt would’ve been an undersized 4 — which is what he actually ended up becoming after getting dealt to Denver in 1984 — such as, oh, Carl Landry or someone of that nature."

http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/9/3/1666979/dreamswalkinginbroaddaylight365degr#45867648

And yes, I realize that Natt was listed at 6’6" tall and the man for whom I used as his modern-day comparison, Landry, is 6’9" tall. Landry, however, has a puny 8’6.5" standing reach, which is terrible for a 4 and pretty much means he’s got the arms of an average wing defensively. Yet, due to Landry’s style of play on offense, he’s strictly an undersized 4, which is probably how Natt would be typecasted if he played the game today.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=nattca01&y1=1982&p2=landrca01&y2=2010

Regarding those per-minute and pace-adjusted stats, the only difference between them is that Natt was a better passer and Landry is a more efficient scorer. Other than that, there are a lot of similarities between them after accounting for the difference in eras.

Oh, and after checking out the 1982-1983 Trail Blazers squad, Kenny Carr was akin to a worse shot blocking version of Paul Millsap, who had some wayward thinkers — such as yourself — once claiming he and LaMarcus Aldridge could perhaps play effectively as forwards in the frontcourt together alongside a true pivotman in Greg Oden or Joel Przybilla.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=carrke01&y1=1983&p2=millspa01&y2=2010

Maybe Carr and Mychal Thompson could play spot minutes at forward together — with Wayne Cooper at center — back in the early’-’80s when the three-point line was in its infancy; though, in this day and age, a decent 2-3 zone could bog down a lineup featuring three non-threats from downtown in the frontcourt.

by AK1984 on Sep 6, 2010 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

A few comments on those early '80s Blazer teams

There’s no doubt that the game has changed, and the way that teams put their rosters together are typically based on who they’re competing against and what it will take to overcome the champs and (hopefully) win a championship.

Back in the early ’80s the nemesis was L*A, with Kareem and Magic in their heyday. I can still remember the story of Harry Glickman running down the aisle to yell at one of the refs, because he saw a foul against Kenny Carr (when the Blazer forward was in the act of shooting) that was egregiously overlooked.

(The more things change, the more they stay the same re: refs and L*A versus Portland. That’s why you have to understand why the Blazer fan’s small market animosity versus Stern and his officials goes back a-ways; the roots of those sour grapes of wrath run deep)

Jack Ramsay had shown Blazer fans what “perfection” looked like in ’77, but the following 9 years was the long defeat (to borrow a line from Tolkien) From the injuries that derailed the ’78 season to the contract disputes with Lucas/Hollins to the mercurial rise and fall of Billy Ray there was a lot of Blazer mediocrity while teams in Boston, L*A and Philly were taking turns winning trophies.

Inman was still the GM, and he was doing his best to put a roster together with players that he and Jack hoped could beat L*A, but they kept coming up short. So, in the mid-80s they made a couple of drastic moves to adapt to the changing NBA. Of course, I’m talking about the Bowie draft and the Vandeweghe trade. It’s easy to see in retrospect that those moves were epic failures but they were done with the idea of spreading the floor and taking advantage of the 3-point line, something that Dr. Jack had not had any experience with (he never worked in the ABA, to my knowledge)

This transition was slow (as you noted with those early-80s shooting percentages) and the playoff results weren’t much better, with the exception of the ‘85 series against Dallas (the first 2 games of which I was fortunate enough to watch from the stands in the old reunion arena down in big D) The main reason Portland won that series was the emergence of a young 6’7 playmaker named Clyde Drexler, which leads me to Buckwalter

Bucky was brought in as a Portland scout as far back as ‘78, but his name wasn’t really known amongst Blazer fans until the mid ‘80s (no internet) After the failure of the Kiki trade and the Bowie draft, Jack and Stu were let go and assistant GM Bucky was elevated to VP of BB ops, alongside Jon Spoelstra. Bucky’s vision was of a more uptempo style to counter the L*kers showtime, because Abdul-Jabbar was in decline and to beat L*A you had to be able to run with them.

So Buckwalter began finding now-familiar players like Drexler, Kersey, Porter and Robinson in the draft, and once Mike Schuler replaced Jack the team’s pace was accelerated to the top of the NBA. The team’s 3-pt% gradually inched up into the low 30s in the late ’80s, as well.

The transition from the Ramsay teams with Carr and Natt as the starting forwards and Mychal Thomson and Wayne Cooper as the centers was complete. The offensive execution may not have been as efficient as it had been under Jack, but the team’s athleticism and rebounding more than made up the difference as they surged back into the finals in the early ’90s

Fast forward ahead 20 years and the old nemesis is still the same, even though the names have changed on those gold-purple jerseys. The league has also changed and there’s an even greater emphasis on the 3-pt line, but one thing that hasn’t changed (if the finals back in June was any indicator) is that it still takes strong interior defense and rebounding to get over the top in a 7 game series.

I appreciate floor-spreading and spacing as much as the next guy, but I see it as only a part of the offense, and not an essential skill for every G-F in the lineup to master. You only have to look at the L*ker and Celtic rosters to come to this conclusion. Do they have stretch 4s that shoot a high volume of 3 pointers? Not really. Has that hindered their success in the post season? Not even.

I guess you could look at the Orlando Magic as the ideal system for the Blazers to run (they have a Van Gundy as coach, after all, and we all hope that Oden will become as dominant as D-How) but until the magic break through and win it all, I wouldn’t seek to emulate their system in every detail. They’re going to have their hands full getting past the Heat, and I don’t see Miami as being the kind of team that is going to live and die with the 3-pt shot, either.

So, I’ve got my offensive philosophy and you’ve got yours, and frankly I don’t care what system the Blazers run as long as it results in post season Ws. An uptempo style is more exciting for the fans, but if it doesn’t result in a championship then it’s ultimately going to be a springtime disappointment. With Roy and Oden entrenched as the key scorers for years to come, its easy to expect the Blazers to remain an average to below-average paced NBA team, regardless of who the head coach is.

Cunningham is going to play. Not a lot, but he’ll force his way into the lineup because he’s active and he can rebound and his defense should improve as he learns the tendencies of his opponents. As far as his offensive contributions are concerned, he’ll do what he’s told and if that means go stand in the corner and be ready to knock down an open shot then I expect the coaches will work with him until he’s competent in doing that, just like they did with Travis. Whether that makes Dante a “3” on offense is not that important (to me) what matters is who he’s effectively guarding at the other end of the floor, and how well the team is doing while he’s in the game

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 6, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

That's an awesome history lesson, without any doubt.

I’ve got nothing more to add on that part, so let me dive into your line here: “I’ve got my offensive philosophy and you’ve got yours […]”

I actually don’t think we differ that much in this case, as well as would argue that I prefer an even slower paced offense than you — as I advocate hiring Mike Fratello of all guys, who’s headed some of the most down-tempo teams in NBA history — and also suggest installing a power-oriented offense centered around Greg Oden in lieu of LMA.

The main difference between you and I is probably at the small forward, because I feel that a guy must be at least a threat from deep at that position. Even the guy I advocate acquiring for defensive and off ball movement purposes, Andre Iguodala, is a guy who shoots the long ball often enough — with roughly 300 attempts each of the past three seasons — to keep the defense honest.

Then again, though, you’re high on Nicolas Batum, who’s shown to be more efficient than Iguodala from beyond the arc — which is the one area that’s in the Frenchman’s favor — yet, to beat the Miami Heat within the next five years, I’d rather take my chances with the hard-nosed on-ball defense of Iggy over the scrawny, passive Nico.

I’m also huge on the 1 spot being filled by a relatively efficient long-range shooter who’s not afraid to launch away a bomb when left open — especially with a ball dominant, high usage star player like Brandon Roy at the other backcourt spot — which is why I’m less than thrilled with Andre Miller in that way. Miller is a great fit with Oden, but the same can’t be said for him and Roy.

At the backup wing spot, it’s well known how much I — as well as you to an extent — wanted Mike Miller here as an offensive sparkplug at the backup 2 and 3 spots, so as to provide long-distance shooting, passing, and all-around offensive versatility. Yet, that wasn’t meant to be, for Miller smartly went to the Miami Heat in search of a championship ring or two … or three … or four.

Yet, as it was, the team used its entire MLE on Wesley Matthews, with the hope that he can be an all-purpose backup wing. My issues with Matthews is he doesn’t really fill both spots, since he’s basically a 3 on offense and an overpriced version of Martell Webster. Instead of overpaying for Matthews, I’d’ve rather the team used its BAE on Roger Mason, Jr. — who’d’ve strictly backed up Brandon Roy for roughly 12 minutes per game — and, perhaps, also signed a minimum-level veteran at the 3 (e.g., Ime Udoka) to provide depth behind both Batum and Luke Babbitt.

by AK1984 on Sep 6, 2010 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

I know, we've been over this

and RFS1970 has chimed in with his feelings re: Miller, as well

I see the Miller-Roy relationship as being different than Blake-Roy, and I think that some Blazer fans are living in the past re: what Brandon was able to do with Steve shooting his “bail out” 3-pointers from the corners. That combo was not good enough to beat the Rockets in 2009, and it shouldn’t be any coincidence that the Blazers upgraded the PG position in the following July.

Miller was an intriguing choice, and I can’t help think that some Bedgers made up their minds about the Miller-Roy backcourt early on and they aren’t going to move off of that position until the team has some post season success—which they were headed towards (IMO) until the last week of the season when Brandon had that blasted knee injury.

As a result, I’ve had the pleasure of defending Andre’s regular season success against a chorus of “he’s not the right fit with Roy” and “Dre’s never won anything in the post season” The CP3 rumors just added more grist to that mill, and of course there’s the unending speculation about Kirk Hinrich, which I’m not going to rehash now

What I expect to see (after hearing Roy’s comments about Andre and hearing good things from Bayno re: Miller) is what we saw in March and early April from ’Dre, Brandon and the rest of the Blazers.

Roy and Miller can take turns beating up on the weakest opposing backcourt defender. Roy can be a spot up shooter early in the game to save his legs, and Andre can get Greg involved early and trigger the fast break when the team defends well.

Batum and LMA can help spread the floor, even though in Aldridge’s case it will be low-percentage 2 pointers. (But no roster or rotation is perfect, even if we hope it would be otherwise)

Once Miller leaves the game—in comes Bayless and Roy can transition to a role that’s closer to his Blake days. Bayless is no Blake from downtown, but he’s a better stick than Andre and a defender had better not run out on Jerryd or Rex will pump fake and attack the rim. I think Roy-Rex will be an effective combo, and I’ve been waiting a couple of years to be proven wrong re: my Porter-Drexler comparison by their play together on the court, and not by speculation.

Anyway, eventually Nic or Brandon will get tired and in will come Matthews. If Roy goes out Wes will play the 2, if he comes in for Batum then he’ll play the 3—I really don’t think it much matters. Sure, Bayless-Mathews-Batum is a trio that could be disrupted ball handling-wise, but I’m not overly concerned about it. Because if they do struggle for a few possessions then Nate will just send Miller back into the game and pull Bayless over to the bench for a little chat.

After about 3 months of this rotation we should know if it’s a winner or a dud. If it stinks then Cho will have some decisions to make, and players like CP3, Parker or even Cap’n Kirk may be more “available” at the deadline than they are right now. (At least, that’s what Andre’s critics can hope for, I guess,although I wouldn’t mind TP as I’ve mentioned in the past, as long as Nic isn’t a part of the deal)

I’d rather see more of what we saw from Miller-Roy from last March-early April with a large portion of Oden thrown into the mix, and the Blazers leading the NW division in Feb. I’m sure there will still be trade talk even if this best-case scenario happens, but it should be more muted and the fan enthusiasm will be higher than the guarded responses that we’re getting these days

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 6, 2010 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

There's a lot that goes into playing a position.

I think it’s easy to get caught up in the traditional skills of the positions. Two4 may be onto something. If Dante can defend his position and he has at least some value on offense, then does it really matter what we call him?

Maybe we should discuss what his contributions are offensively, and which positions he can generally guard. I’d guess he could guard most 3s and some less physical 4s at least. Sounds like the consensus is that he can get a few offensive rebounds and hit the mid range jumper on offense. That isn’t so awful.

by Z-Bones on Sep 6, 2010 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

And yikes.

I posted that just seeing a small part of that conversation. Didn’t realize it lasted so long. My comment looks silly after reading that entire mess. Ignore it. Please.

by Z-Bones on Sep 6, 2010 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

You can see a lot of the court from the corner.

When you’re not a 7 footer, the best way to get offensive rebounds comes in two steps. The first is to see the entire court, see when the ball is shot, and see the trajectory. From there you try to get into position to secure the rebound and then go up and grab it. I know it sounds stupid saying all that, but from the corner, you can do all of those things pretty well. Seeing the trajectory very well is probably the hardest part of all that. You usually get a better feel for the trajectory when you’re not hugging the baseline.

by Z-Bones on Sep 6, 2010 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

I really like Dante, but I'm still convinced he'll never get the handles to be a penetration threat.

I still haven’t seen any examples of a player developing NBA handles after say age 23.

Trout, remember, was a lot younger—and, I’d submit, his lack of handles is still his biggest detriment, one that has limited his success and potential significantly.

by Marvin100 on Sep 4, 2010 10:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not a huge threat, no

Cunningham is limited offensively, but he’ll be a solid NBA role player for years. Did you see him in the summer league? (I know, weak competition and small sample size…) Kanales and Bayno had him catch, pump fake as the defender came flying out at him, then dribble, step around and head towards the basket (Pete Newell used to call this the “Kiki” move—after Vandeweghe, who was an early pupil and later instructor, along with Kermit Washington—in Pete’s famous big man camp)

To answer your question if young players can improve their handles through instruction, that’s where I’d point you. Kermit was a leading rebounder in the NCAA but he had no offensive moves other than a lay-in. Newell worked with him one-on-one and Washington became serviceable on offense (and this relationship later led to the beginning Pete’s offseason camp, a similar camp is now run by Tim Grgvich)

That’s what I expect from Dante, to be able to catch the ball 10-15 away from the basket and make a good decision with it, which will hopefully resulting in a made basket or FTs at least 60% of the time. His handles don’t have to look pretty as long as they’re productive, reducing turnovers and putting interior pressure on the defense should be the goal

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 5, 2010 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

Dante in some ways...

…reminds me of Batum. I think Batum is a better player right now, but they’re both pretty smooth. Rarely out of control. I think soon they’ll both be good shooters. I think Dante plays with a little more scrappy energy though. Batum is just the definition of “cool” and “smooth”. Dante hustles for those rebounds more probably. But I really like them both. And even if I think Batum will end up being the better player, I think they do have a few similarities.

by Z-Bones on Sep 6, 2010 10:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

they're both fundamentally sound

but I would say that Nic has a much better feel for the game. He’s had some good coaching along the way, but he’s more of a natural (could be the genes, his dad played pro hoops, although those skills don’t always translate to the kids)

Dante was definitely well-coached at ‘Nova. He doesn’t have the same natural ability as Batum, but he’s bigger and should play closer to the basket. Cunningham is an instinctive “out of area” rebounder, and he plays bigger than he looks underneath, because he gets good leverage and can box out players who outweigh him. He also has great footwork on the pick and pop, and hopefully he will stretch his shooting range out to include the corner trey, and penetrate just enough to keep the defenders honest

Bottom line: Nic will be a starter who could develop into a star, Dante will be a role player, especially if he stays with Portland. They can both be valuable members of a championship-caliber rotation. I would be very hesitant to put either one of them into a trade proposal

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 7, 2010 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

Especially considering...

the bang-for-the-buck you get with those two. Don’t trade them. In Nic’s benefit, he’s played quite a lot of NBA basketball the past two years, and some international ball besides. I think Cunningham is one year older, but he’s been playing against college kids rather than the best in the world the past few years. I know from personal experience in sports, video games and other competitive activities that it’s really difficult to improve once you’re one of the most skilled in your group. At some point, you have to move up and play people that are better than you to continue improving. That’s what Batum has been able to do the past few years and now Cunningham will be doing that as well.

But we aren’t even arguing on this. We both suspect the same things about Nic’s and Dante’s potential, but we should also remember that we only saw Cunningham play minor minutes of the bench last year. He isn’t a finished project yet just like hopefully Batum isn’t.

by Z-Bones on Sep 7, 2010 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

At best, Dante Cunningham could perhaps become a "role player [...]

of a championship-caliber rotation" someday. For Cunningham, it’d be in the style of Udonis Haslem circa the 2006 NBA Playoffs, but without the extensive playing time the Miami native and Florida alum received with the Heat. From a per-minute/pace-adjusted standpoint, however, the impact should be fairly similar when Cunningham hits the court.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=cunnida01&y1=2010&p2=hasleud01&y2=2006

As it was, though, Haslem never stretched out his shooting range, never improved on his handles, and never developed a dribble-drive game to penetrate from the elbow up on the high-post or the baseline from the side; that just wasn’t in his inherent skill set. Yet, even without a versatile offensive repertoire, Haslem nevertheless made an impact as a pure pick-and-pop 4 who worked hard on defense and the glass, which is what should be expected out of Cunningham.

All things considered, Cunningham will most likely never be expected to “keep the defenders honest” — since the guy isn’t built to be a major focal point on offense — instead, he ought to just go out there for spot minutes sporadically and do what comes natural to him.

by AK1984 on Sep 7, 2010 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

Cunningham will most likely never be expected to "keep the defenders honest" — since the guy isn’t built to be a major focal point on offense

What I meant was, if he catches the ball and faces up to shoot (from whatever distance, 15-23 feet eventually) and the defender runs out at him, Dante should be able to put the ball on the floor for a dribble or two and make something positive happen with the ball (pull up jumper with high probability of sucess, like Travis…or if he’s closer to the paint then take it all the way to the hole and draw contact, etc)

I don’t expect the “finished product” to show up after 12 months of pro instruction, but that’s what they’re working towards on the side

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 7, 2010 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

That's a fair comparison.

Dante could exceed it, and 3pt range is what I feel he’s mostly likely and able to learn, but Haslem would be a fine ceiling.

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Sep 7, 2010 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

I won't bet against you.

I can still hope though.

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Sep 8, 2010 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

it's like potato chips

once DC starts taking ‘em, he won’t be able to stop

but will he open the bag and try one? There’s the rub

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 8, 2010 7:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'd always heard that you are what you guard.

If that’s the case, Dante can take his pick. I think he has the intelligence and physique to make life difficult for either 3s or 4s. He isn’t quick enough to stay with some 3s and he isn’t big enough to stop some 4s, but there are a lot of players in between that he can put the hurt on.

But you’re right, DC probably would get taken to task by a player like Boozer, but guess what? Boozer is a starting PF and a franchise player, whereas Dante is going to be a sophomore coming off the bench. They won’t even see each other! In the Chicago games, Dante will be keeping the pressure on Taj Gibson and James Johnson, not Boozer. That unfortunate task falls to LMA or Camby, and if you want another reason Camby should start, just recall LMA trying to guard Boozer. Weak sauce.

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 2, 2010 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed.

Ability to play a position is more about defensive ability than offensive arsenal. I agree with your analysis of DC defensive capabilities.

by upper left corner on Sep 4, 2010 8:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed.

This has started a really interesting conversation about this on some blogs.

Basically though the main point is that you can design your offense and subdivide responsibilities however you want.

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Sep 4, 2010 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

if you want another reason Camby should start, just recall LMA trying to guard Boozer. Weak sauce.

Yeah, I’m so glad Carlos is out of the division. I’m not as worried about the Jazz with Millsap and Jefferson. (Camby wasn’t having much luck with Boozer either, too skinny)

hopefully LMA’s extra weight and Buck’s big man coaching will help make a difference. I thought that Cunningham was Portland’s most-effective defender against Melo last year (hopefully Anthony will be leaving the division soon, as well) and in time Dante might be the best Blazer to guard LeBron, when the time comes. Batum may put on weight as he ages, and Matthews should be able to battle the physical SFs as well

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 4, 2010 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

A nice enough read

I don’t know that anything said in it was particularly earth-shattering, though. Basically stating the depth chart and why you put them in that order.

When you say that Elliot Williams should never be in the regular rotation and then admit that you don’t know anything about his game…I think the conclusions should probably follow a little more research than that. I don’t know that Williams should be a rotation player either but I wouldn’t say that it’s a bad thing if he hits the court, especially if he can really play. Everyone wrote off Batum his rookie season too (before it started). Remember that.

But I’ll give it a rec anyway—it’s not a bad read overall. And I especially like the Dante love.

by jamon51 on Sep 2, 2010 7:26 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Everyone wrote off Batum his rookie season too (before it started).

Too true.

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 2, 2010 10:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why is nobody

Talking about the Blazers being a #1 defense next year? Looking at the personnel if healthy they should be close at least.

Bat88m

by RyanRTE on Sep 2, 2010 11:56 PM PDT reply actions  

Regarding Bayless

I don’t see him as a starter. I see him as more of a bench scoring option.

"Sasha? That's a sissy name." -Mike Rice

by koyote on Sep 3, 2010 12:04 AM PDT reply actions  

Travis Outlaw 2.0?

Oh no, don't tell me Matt Barkley ALSO doesn't tie his shoes...
September 1st, 2010. A day that shall live in infamy.
"Because one of the great minds of the 21st century is raising glow-in-the-dark fish and weaving serapes..." -Leonard Hofstadter from The Big Bang Theory

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Sep 3, 2010 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

more of a Jason Terry

but with a better scowl face.

"Sasha? That's a sissy name." -Mike Rice

by koyote on Sep 4, 2010 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think the jury is still out

Given that the team hasn’t brought in a veteran PG, it appears that they have not given up on him as a PG. He has clearly shown that he can score and do so with reasonable efficiency. He had the second highest per minute scoring average on the team and a better TS% than Miller had last year or than Roy had in his second season.

Whether or not he can be more than a bench scorer is probably going to be sorted out this season. He isn’t likely to become Steve Nash, but the debate is very much about whether or not that is necessary for him to be a good fit next to Roy.

A lot of folks, myself included, want to see Bayless get significant minutes next to Roy. This isn’t because we think he is a better PG than Miller; it is because we think he is a better fit next to Roy, for those periods of the game where Roy wants to be the primary playmaker on the offensive end. Bayless is a better 3 pt shooter than Miller and a better man to man defender against small quick PGs. Meanwhile, Miller can start, go to the bench early when Bayless comes in, and then come back out and QB the second unit.

by upper left corner on Sep 4, 2010 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree that Bayless should get more minutes

Especially now that Rudy has checked out.

I just get nervous when I hear talk about Bayless becoming the future starting point guard. The Blazers don’t need scoring at the point. At least not with the starters.

Jerryd’s number one strength is that he brings energy and a scoring punch when Roy is out of the game. You need a guy like that on your bench, a la Jason Terry.

"Sasha? That's a sissy name." -Mike Rice

by koyote on Sep 4, 2010 3:13 PM PDT reply actions  

You raise a good point.

Without Rudy, who will be the Blazer’s sixth man? Jerryd? Mathews? Cunningham?

According to the announcer at the RG, we’re the sixth man, but he also says that the RG is “our house” and that is completely untrue (I could never afford the rent).

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 4, 2010 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Camby.

No joke. If he doesn’t start he’s clearly our most valuable bench player.

Long term, Jerryd or WM.

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Sep 4, 2010 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

TO25

That stands for Travis Outlaw 25. He would have been a nice 6th man. At least I thought he would have.

by Hopman27 on Sep 4, 2010 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm expecting it to be Bayless, if scoring is needed off the bench

Bayno said something similar the other day

Nate has plans to play him at both spots…to be the backup point but also come in and provide some offense and play off the ball a little bit when he’s in there with Brandon and/or Andre…we need Jerryd to bust out this year.

Portland’s guard rotation is going to be a very interesting proposition. Miller, Batum or LMA could also return to the game with the non-starters and receive more touches. It’s going to depend on the match ups

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 4, 2010 10:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

Your title honestly didn’t attract me to read this, but when I did, it was a great read!
I’m diggin’ on what you have to say about Jerryd Bayless. He may not be that traditional point guard, but he’s not that bad of a player. Hey, he seemed more dependable than Rudy.
Though I haven’t seen Armon play yet, I’m eager to see him play soon. I heard he plays fair defense.
Well, I try to look at the positives, and it’s hard to do so with the 09-10 season. The positive I see is that we got Camby, so if you imagine us next year, Oden, Camby, and Przy would lock teams down in the paint.
Also, I like the way you described how Oden and Camby rebounds. I thought it was pretty tight, the vocabs you used.

by Hopman27 on Sep 4, 2010 10:27 PM PDT reply actions  

I agree with you, mostly.

I don’t think that Jerryd will, or even should, get most of the PG minutes yet. Maybe by the end of the season if he really progresses a lot. Otherwise, I’m fine with miller. And I think you are under rating LMA.
That bit about a future Bayless/Johnson pg combo is awesome.

Anything I write after midnight should be taken with a grain of salt.
In K.P. I STILL trust.
Travis Outlaw fan from the beginning.

by llamaiguana on Sep 5, 2010 9:37 PM PDT reply actions  

Agree on the top 10 Blazer players, with a new trade angle..

Basically agree. Many are calling to trade Przybilla’s expiring.. Big mistake, Cho should extend him and keep all three centers.. Next years draft is very thin on centers… If all three Blazer centers are healthy, what a huge trade value they will have..

I do believe one consolidation trade needs to be made. However, I have a different angle on this subject from any I have read so far. I believe we should trade one or two of our end of the bench players, and maybe a euro or two, along with next years first, to team like Toronto, NJ or Detroit, for their next years unprotected first. Basically, move up into next years lottery using the extra players. The Blazers do not improve this year. However, this trade will give the Blazers a good shot at that last piece needed for a run at the ring. Trading for that last piece has not gone well so far, and picking late, or even in the middle of first round, in not working.

by oldfishermen on Sep 7, 2010 3:17 PM PDT reply actions  

Many are calling to trade Przybilla’s expiring.. Big mistake, Cho should extend him and keep all three centers.. Next years draft is very thin on centers… If all three Blazer centers are healthy, what a huge trade value they will have..

Agreed

I believe we should trade one or two of our end of the bench players, and maybe a euro or two, along with next years first, to team like Toronto, NJ or Detroit, for their next years unprotected first. Basically, move up into next years lottery using the extra players.

Disagree. I think the “missing piece” is not another rookie, but veterans with playoff experience. One could be acquired as you describe, another could be added with the MLE. If the Blazers can advance past round 1 next spring they will become a greater FA destination

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 8, 2010 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

Out of the box thinking

While I agree with your view, not sure it is the practical answer anymore. Such moves should have been made before last season. Making them this season will be very difficult, if possible at all? It may take Cho’s out of the box thinking to acquire the Blazer’s missing piece. Thus my thought provoking trade idea…

First, which player is available and can be acquired with the MLE that will put the Blazers over the top?? Not trying to be a smart butt here, I really do not have a clue…

Second, which team is whiling to help the Blazers make a consolidation trade knowing it will make the Blazers a serious contender?? And also has a player Nate can work into his system??

Third, Cap space, another developing issue to keep in mind. The salaries of the core roster are getting higher each year. At some point soon, the only answer will be to bring in good young players on rookie contracts, or include core players in a trade.

Making a consolidation trade now, for a future lottery pick player could be the best option all around.

While there is always hope another team will want to make a big roster move before the trade deadline. We had the same hope last year, and the year before, and it did not happen.. It may be time for Cho to make it happen, by acquiring a future high draft pick.

by oldfishermen on Sep 8, 2010 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

The best chance to get a vet in trade...

would be from an older team wanting to get younger, or a team that underachieves and decides to rebuild. So it’s hard to say who that’ll be. T4L wants Tony Parker, which is plausible – I can’t think of many other vets that have Finals-level experience, aren’t too old, and fill a need for us.

Cap space is gone in the foreseeable future anyway. Accept it. Paul Allen is willing and able to pay the luxury tax – good thing too. That means we can draft rookies, possibly make sign-and-trades although those are rare, and keep using the MLE (although I hope we don’t use it automatically as the MLE is historically badly used).

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Sep 8, 2010 6:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Oh, also, re: cap space/lux tax/whatever, the new CBA is likely to change everything.

It could change how extensions work. It could change restricted free agency. It could reduce the amounts of all existing contracts by 10%. We don’t know.

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Sep 8, 2010 6:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

I just heard Amundson is still unsigned.

I though he was a great backup big man for Phoenix, and I can’t believe they wouldn’t sign him. Last season they let Ben Wallace go back to Detroit to have a great year, now this. Seriously…

I know we’re working on quite the collection of bigs, but that’s never a bad thing, right? Maybe picking him up and moving Rudy for a draft pick would be the move to make. What do y’all think of the guy?

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 8, 2010 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not to mention...

At $855,189…

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 8, 2010 7:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Nice player, but...

Amundson is nice player and a good addition to any bench.

However, I am working on the theory the Blazers are one very good player away from being a ring contending team. Amundson is good, but not that good to put the Blazers over the top, if he sees any playing time.

Guess I am not making my thoughts totally clear yet. What other big need will the Blazers have in the near future? Their future starting PG..

What if trading some players away today, to make a very weak team a little better this year, results in the Blazers drafting the top PG in next years draft? Would a player like Kyrie Irving be of interest to anyone here?? http://www.nbadraft.net/players/kyrie-irving

by oldfishermen on Sep 8, 2010 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yup, draft another PG, top tier PG that is.

Wish I had his money, but not PA playing here..

Guess I do want to draft another PG, or trade for Parker, (only if he signs an extension)..

None of the Blazer PGs, other than Miller, is a starting caliber PG on a championship team at this time, including Bayless… There is the potential for several of them to develop into decent backups, or even starting PGs on mediocre teams.. However, the Blazers still need a top tier starting PG to get out of the first round and contend for a ring.

Quantity does not equal quality.

Also, drafting the top PG in next years draft was just an example of the quality of player we should be shooting for in a trade.. Drafting the top PF or C in next years draft is also an option to explore.

by oldfishermen on Sep 8, 2010 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

If you're talking about Duke players who'll potentially be in the 2011 NBA Draft, then ...

Nolan Smith makes the most sense based on likely draft position, what the team needs in a player at the 1 alongside Brandon Roy, et cetera.

by AK1984 on Sep 8, 2010 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Meh

I’d rather just play Cunningham than use the BAE on Amundson. If he’s still unsigned then he’s either asking too much, or the rest of the league isn’t all that interested in him

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 8, 2010 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

The Phoenix Suns negotiated a partial buyout with Ben Wallace last year to save money.

That was a sound, fiscally prudent transaction, with the monetary aspect being something that people must learn to take into account in such situations.

by AK1984 on Sep 8, 2010 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

True...

but they sure could have used him in the playoffs. LAL out-muscled them in a big way.

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Sep 8, 2010 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

which player is available and can be acquired with the MLE that will put the Blazers over the top?? Not trying to be a smart butt here, I really do not have a clue…

I don’t have the 2011 FA list handy. My suspicion is the closer a team gets to the finals, the more veteran FAs will be interested re: playing for them. (Even if thy have better offers on the table than the MLE. It’s all about the opportunity.) Portland hasn’t been in the position to woo veterans for 10 years—all they been able to sell is potential—and only Joel, Andre and Marcus have bought in. I find it ironic that the ECs for 2 of these guys are everybody’s favorite trade assets. I think that could send the wrong message to future veteran FAs.

which team is whiling to help the Blazers make a consolidation trade knowing it will make the Blazers a serious contender?

That question may be easier to answer at midseason, when some teams may be out of the playoff hunt and are looking to flip a particular veteran for some of the young players that Portland has stockpiled.

Cap space, another developing issue to keep in mind. The salaries of the core roster are getting higher each year. At some point soon, the only answer will be to bring in good young players on rookie contracts, or include core players in a trade.

Paul Allen will be willing to spend more once the team has playoff success (that generates additional revenue in May) I’m one of the few Bedgers who is willing to consider flipping LMA for a veteran PG (Parker) if the Spurs are interested. Much depends on how Aldridge responds to a healthy Oden re: offensive usage and how LaMarcus complements Greg. On paper it looks promising, on the court may be another story. LMA could become a WARP casualty, it’s something to watch for

Making a consolidation trade now, for a future lottery pick player could be the best option all around.

Much easier said than done. These picks are not handed out like candy at Halloween. Rich might get lucky, but then he’s still at the mercy of the lottery balls. Then there’s still the matter of paying the kid 3 years guaranteed and waiting for him to develop. Give me the veteran in February who already knows the league and has playoff experience. Brandon’s knees can’t wait on a 2011 draft choice to finally start paying dividends in 2013

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 8, 2010 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

*they

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 8, 2010 7:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

Like the Parker as a Blazer idea.

Agree, I would also enjoy seeing Parker playing next to BRoy rather than developing a future PG. However, only if Parker signs an extension first.. Not sure I would give up LMA for him…
  
Just looking at other options to pick up the future starting PG.. Not many veteran PGs in the league would fit well playing next to BRoy…

by oldfishermen on Sep 8, 2010 7:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The ultimate coverage and analysis of the Portland Trail Blazers.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
The Blazers Future Regarding Free Agent Signings
Small
Thunderous Manboobies
Img_0878_1__small
Why do we hate LaMarcus Aldridge?
Small
Oregonlive "journalists" 2 new posts...same old drivel
2474796688_7cdc78828f_o_small
Greg Oden Suffers Life-Ending Injury; Gets 3-Year Extension

Recent FanPosts

Small
The Blazers' Future Regarding Trades
Small
WHAT TO DO WITH NIC BATUM BECAUSE WE WILL LOSE HIM IF NOT TRADED.
Small
Trade that helps us out now and the future
Small
How can the All-Star game be more fun and competitive?
Small
Earl Boykins!
Small
LaMarcus Aldridge about to become the 10th highest scorer in Blazers franchise  history
Small
New trade that gets us a new point and a three point shooter
Small
Portland getting.....
Small
The Sun Behind the Clouds: Blazers still on track.

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

It's pretty clear that the season is over already ;)
Double rainbow of sadness:

1) JBay is getting shorter
2) We never got to see him with a mustache

I miss you tiny raptor man.

via The Basketball Jones http://blogs.thescore.com/tbj/2012/02/09/things-of-note-for-february-9-2012/#more-34561
Blazers Broadcasters Mike Barrett and Mike Rice re-enacted NBA referee Scott Foster's controversial goaltending call on Portland Trail Blazers forward LaMarcus Aldridge, who was defending Oklahoma City Thunder All-Star forward Kevin Durant, during this week's edition of Blazers Courtside. Remarkably, no one was injured during the taping of this segment.

Original video of the play here. 
Quotes from the players and coaches here. 
The NBA admitting it got the call wrong here. 
Dave's  extended thoughts here. 
BlazersMakr's FanShot: Major Vegas action on OKC prior to tip here. 
Audio of Chad Doing of 750 AM The Game going HAM on Foster here.

OK, that should just about wrap up the goaltending discussion.

Courtside video via Blazers Broadcasting cameraman John Curry.

-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
In 2008 Tim Donaghy indicated that Scott Foster was a ref that also fixed games
Blazers Owner Paul Allen Ranked No. 3 American Philanthropist In 2011

Recent FanShots

"You Must Be Known For Your Defense, Because You Definitely Stole My Heart"
Bill Simmons: Deron Williams To Dallas 'Is A Lock'
LaMarcus Aldridge Needs Support Around Him
LaMarcus Aldridge Finds Out He's An All-Star With His Teammates
Congratulations to Portland Trail Blazers forward LaMarcus Aldridge, on his first All Star selection.

As seen on www.trailblazers.com
AWoj: Aldridge an All Star
CRAZY stat from Houston game
NBA MVP Rankings... LMA @ #10

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Headshotsmall_small Ben Golliver

Lead Moderators

Getfuzzy-satchel_small Timmay!

Bucky3_small Cablinasian

Authors

Plainlc_small Storyteller

Moderators

Lamb_small T Darkstar

Small douglast

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Lrg_magpie_small Corvid

Wallpaper_small geoffm