Bill Bayno interviewed on WaW (Sept 1, hour 2)
Here are a few excerpts, Mike Barrett was the host
"I said this last year and all our coaches agree with it, I think he [Batum] is an all-star waiting to happen, he's got all-star ability...his ballhandling is improved, getting the ball in traffic and pushing it. I think his overall confidence, playing with the national team is going to improve...he's a great kid, he listens, he's coachable...I have no doubts about him, I really don't...the pads are a really good teaching tool for guys in the post, we'll figure out what his go-to moves are down there once we put him in there, let him get comfortable with it and have him play some one-on-one against Dante and Luke...start to develop that and I'll think it'll come"
"We need a stronger base of leadership where the players are vocal and getting after each other, I'd like to see that this September and into training camp"
"Jerryd is nursing an injury...the 2 focuses I had for him [during summer workouts] was to make his left hand as good as his right...getting to the rim and shooting a little left hand floater...and to continue to improve the consistency with his jump shot...he's a competitor, I know he's ready, there's no doubt...you don't get any tougher than Jerryd...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...if Rudy's not back that certainly is going to open up a lot of minutes and give Jerryd his opportunity."
over 1 year ago
two4larue
106 comments
8 recs |
Email
PrintComments
as for Jerryd,
the time has come to shine.
Rudy got his shot last year, and he flamed out. Jerryd should benefit from extended minutes, assuming he gets consistent run. As for me, I enjoy seeing hard work rewarded.
Coach is not going to go to Elliot or Armon, and certainly not Patty, not this year. Really, Coach very little choice but to give the ball to Rex, night in, and night out.
It’s his third year; his time has come. He’ll put it together, or he’ll be our next scapegoat. Life on BE…
It's right what Bayno says
Bayless needs to bust out this year. He talks in terms of Batum’s potential but really Batum also needs to bust out this year. The same is obviously true for Oden. This may not be a do-or-die situation for their careers but I think especially Oden and Bayless’ futures will be defined by this year. Bayless in particular needs to find a place in this league this year. Oden can always find somebody to pay for his size.
agree with you. This is the year we get to really see Bayless shine. As for Oden, this is the year he’ll do well. I don’t see all-star level YET. If he DOES do that, then I’d be MORE than happy. Being realistic as an Oden fan, I think he’ll have a slow start: both rusty skills and low playing time (15 min?) but after all-star break, if Oden doesn’t polish up, he will now.
It will be interesting to see how many minutes Bayless can take from Matthews at backup SG.
Matthews is getting paid about $2900 a minute (based on 2000 minutes of play this season), but Nate don’t pay the bills.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 3, 2010 10:48 PM PDT reply actions
As always, it will depend on the matchups and game situation
I thought it was interesting that Bayno said “with Brandon and/or Andre” The “and” leaves room for a potential 3-guard lineup. I hope those situations are rare for Brandon’s sake, but if the other coach wants to try going small, the Blazers will have 3 “dynamic” guards to run out there
If Nate needs more tempo and offense he can play Bayless at backup 2. Jerryd can also “do a Portland” when Brandon has the ball on an ISO. Bill said he has been working with Rex to “to continue to improve the consistency of his jumper” (This dovetails with Jerryd’s second half shooting stats that ULC is fond of reminding everyone.)
Of course if Nate needs a bigger backcourt and more defense he can run Matthews in there. (I could care less “who is playing how much versus what their salaries are” once the season starts)
As I was perusing the archives to answer some burning questions about what Rudy’s agent said 2-3 weeks ago, I came across the blog entry where Bayless said he “tweaked” something. The fanshot was from one month ago. I understand Portland’s desire to be cautious in early Sept, but if a player is having his activity limited for something that he reported 30 days ago, either it’s a bigger tweak than they thought it was at first, or it was re-tweaked, or perhaps it’s a new tweak in another area of Jerryd’s anatomy.
(Personally, the only time I ever want to hear the word “tweak” in reference to the Blazers is when Rich Cho starts making small adjustments to the roster, especially the kind that adds veteran experience to the mix)
Gotta love the Blazer coaches telling Bayno they think Batum is an all-star waiting to happen. What’s next? Buck Williams quoted saying that Nic will be the next Scottie Pippen?
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
The only time I ever want to hear the word "tweak" in reference to the Blazers...
Is if Jeff Pendergraph is tweaking on amphetamines and kangaroo kicking people with his buddy Patty MIlls
Stranger than Bayless' tweak(s) is Elliot Williams' situation.
He said he was ready to play in Summer League, but the Blazers wouldn’t let him play. Now the Blazers still won’t let him play???
I also remember Bayno saying he worked out with Williams, Miller, and Pendergraph in LA about a month ago. I’ve got this image in my head of Bayno beating on Pendergraph with those pads, while Miller and Williams are sitting on the sideline playing cards and yelling encouragement to Pendergraph.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 4, 2010 12:04 AM PDT up reply actions
Nate don't get care what Matthews is getting paid because it ain't his money.
But I suspect Nate was part of a group pushing for Matthews (somebody had to and Allen probably listened to Nate as much as Chad and Born) so he’s probably predisposed to get Matthews plenty of time. Of course, that could change fast if Matthews doesn’t step up and Bayless does.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 4, 2010 12:12 AM PDT up reply actions
bench scoring
depending on how the rotations are set up, Nate may need to play Bayless a much as Matthews, especially if the reserves are struggling to score
We’ve gone over this preseason PT distribution and positional “logjams” for a few years now, and after last year’s injury blitz I promised myself not to stress about it, anymore. It’s impossible to predict who will get hurt and for how long, and a big part of the reason why Matthews was added to the roster was there wasn’t enough quality depth at the 2-3 in case Brandon or Nic missed a string of games, again. Martell’s agent asked for a trade for this same kind of concern (not enough PT behind Batum, assuming good health to all) so after Webster was dealt, that left a hole at backup SF and Wesley is going to be the filler.
Both Bayless and Matthews are incredibly driven individuals who will fight for the backup SG minutes but they are also not the kind of guys who will gripe if they aren’t getting enough run. At some point of the season, they are both going to be needed to play more than 20 mpg as injuries and the match ups dictate, and I fully expect them to be ready and for the team to not suffer much of a drop-off in production. That’s what having a talented and hungry bench is all about, to make it through an 82-game season without falling into a pothole when one of the key starters can’t answer the bell for awhile.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
depending on how the rotations are set up, Nate may need to play Bayless a much as Matthews
or he may not. Hence, what I said that started this thread. It will be interesting to see how many minutes Bayless can take from Matthews at backup SG.
What’s important is that Batum finally gets 32+ minutes. Then whoever plays better at backup SG (Matthews or Bayless) can have those 11-12 minutes behind Roy.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 4, 2010 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions
still
don’t like the idea that Matthews got over-paid. Well, Allen is rich, but still. Hope that money won’t cause to be a problem.
Matthews= MINI-BATUM!!!
GO BLAZERS!!! WOO!
Look at the alternatives
Portland could have tried to sign Raja Bell. I was in favor of this idea. Bell is an old veteran wing who is a tough-nosed defender and who can knock down 3-pt shots. He signed with the Jazz for 3 years, 9.7 mil. Portland was looking for a younger player to match up their current core for the next 5 years
The Blazers could have signed Roger Mason Jr. He was let go by the Spurs (never a good sign) because his 3-pt shooting percentage dropped off the table (42-33) and he sat around in July while most of the other FAs were signed before he finally agreed to a one-year 1.4 mil contract with the Knicks. Mason Jr., even more so than Matthews, compares to Martell. Signing Roger would have been a lateral roster move intended to save money, at best
The Blazer could have done nothing with their MLE and come into the season with Luke Babbitt and Dante Cunningham as the backups to Batum. For a team that’s ready to win now, this scenario was unacceptable. One injury to Batum (or Roy) and the team would be depending on rookies to play too many minutes at the 2-3.
Born and Buchanan said the offseason focus was to improve the team’s perimeter defense, and it’s easy to see why they targeted Matthews. The full MLE was necessary to pry Wesley away from the Jazz, so the dollar amount shouldn’t be used as a reason to discount the improvement to the depth of the roster, or as a reason why WM will receive any more minutes than his play will earn him. Matthews is not the kind of player who will sit back and relax now that he has financial security, he’ll continue to work hard and “earn” his salary in years to come.
Will Wesley’s salary “hurt” the Blazers in the future or prevent them from signing other players or making consolidation deals? It’s possible, but after Miller and Przybilla the team doesn’t have any mid-level salaries, so in the future Matthews an his salalry could be part of a trade, if the front office decides that he’s not working out or his salary is required to “improve the roster” I certainly wouldn’t anticipate this happening any time soon, but after this coming season Wesley’s salary will be reasonable and I expect his production/value to increase, even if he’s only able to play 20-25 minutes behind Roy and Batum on most nights
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Roger Mason, Jr. doesn't compare at all to Martell Webster, for the former is a 2/1 and ...
the latter is a 3/2. The Minnesota T’wolves will soon learn Webster is really a pure 3 — as I was being kind there listing him as a “3/2” — but let David Kahn and co. harbor false hope in the meantime; it’s all they got there.
Stylistically, they’re entirely different players. On offense, Mason, Jr. blows Webster out of the water with regards to AST%, assist ratio, assist-to-turnover ratio, and the percentage of jump shot attempts that are created without needing an assist from a teammate — while I expect his 3PT% will pick back up again after a down season, too — yet, on the other hand, Webster trumps Mason, Jr. on the defensive end.
When I was looking up where Mason was just signed to, as a FA
I came across a stat’s site that had the players listed re: who is the closest match to Mason…and guess who’s name was 2-3 on the list?
so there must be some similarities between Roger and Marty. You can’t argue with the computer!
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
That doesn't really any make sense, for they're entirely different players for the ...
very reasons — both statistically and stylistically — that I stated above. What, on that note, was the criteria for this uncited comparison?
As it is, though, they’re statistically similar career wise just in steal percentage, usage percentage, and efficiency. The problem with the efficiency comparison, however, is that they score in different ways — as Mason, Jr. can create for himself and Webster is mainly a spot-up shooter — which is where the positional adjustment should be brought into play. Also, the differences are extremely, extremely stark when it comes to anything related to handling and distributing the ball in favor for Mason, Jr. and on defense in favor of Webster.
For Mason, Jr., his best-case scenario going forward into his 30s is having a nice run in New York such as Anthony Parker recently had in Toronto from 2006-2007 through 2008-2009. Mason, Jr. should get plenty of playing time at the 2 in New York — with Wilson Chandler’s minutes getting cut drastically from last season — off the bench alongside Toney Douglas, who’s an off guard at the 1.
The only fear for Mason, Jr. is if Bill Walker shows that the last bit of this past season wasn’t a fluke and forces his way onto the court for backup minuets at both the 3 and the 2. Neither Kelenna Azubukie and Andy Rautins should be an issue, though, since Azubukie’s knee is still shot and Rautins sucks.
I have no idea what criteria the website used
I just saw the player comparison, and made myself a mental note to mention it
as far as the Blazers acquiring Mason goes…if he’s not known as a strong defender then I can understand why Portland chose Matthews, even though the cost and long-term commitment was much higher. The bench could be weaker offensively because of the choice, but the goal was to upgrade the perimeter defensive and intensity, according to the scouts (who were interviewed a few times before Cho took over)
I would have targeted Mike Miller, then Bell as FAs, as I mentioned at the time. But I have no problem with the Matthews acquisition, because I expect Wesley to grow into the role, and he could be a starter if Batum/Roy miss time during the season. (Take your pick if Batum or Matthews are starting at the “2” on offense in case Brandon is out, or Nate might choose to start Bayless next to Miller, instead, then stagger the 1-2 rotation)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Y'know, it must be the similar efficiency numbers in FG%, eFG%, and TS%, ...
because Martell Webster and Roger Mason, Jr. are like exactly the same over their respective careers in that regard. That’s kind of cool in a way, too, but it doesn’t make for a good comparison due to the different ways in which they score.
As it is, Mason, Jr. gets field-goal opportunities for himself sometimes in spot-up situations, sometimes using screens, and sometimes off the dribble — which makes me think of a homeless man’s Ray Allen — and rarely drives to the hoop (i.e., 90% of his shots the past few years have been jumpers).
http://www.82games.com/0910/09SAS4.HTM
http://www.82games.com/0809/08SAS5.HTM
http://www.82games.com/0708/07WAS4A.HTM
Webster, on the other hand, is a roughly 3/4 spot-up shooter from deep and a roughly 1/4 cutter/slasher inside, who needed someone to feed him the ball 71% of the time he attempted close-range shot. Now, on jump shots, Webster was assisted a staggering 90% of the time, which places him in like Mickael Pietrus/Quentin Richardson territory of being dependent on others to facilitate things for him.
http://www.82games.com/0910/09POR8.HTM
For Webster’s sake, it unfortunate he’s stuck on a poor, mismanaged team Minnesota versus a good team that’d utilize him to his strengths like Orlando.
I had hoped we would end up sending him to ORL
once it became clear that we probably weren’t going to keep him. He could beast there, and would probably be their best option at the 3, assuming Lewis plays the 4.
Too bad for Marty…
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
Sadly, Orlando already has Mickael Pietrus.
And Quentin Richardson, as you noted.
Anyway I think originally the point of this was available MLE FAs who could play backup 2 or 3. Mike Miller would have been great but unrealistic, Raja Bell would have been nice but I could see age or injury as a concern. Thus, WesMat.
Curious, AK, who would you have pursued (assuming Mike Miller was off the table)?
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
If I projected that Jerryd Bayless would be a backup combo guard ...
and didn’t really need someone to spell Brandon Roy at the 2 — which would’ve removed Roger Mason, Jr. as an option — then a backup 3 such as Keith Bogans would’ve been worthwhile to sign to a two-year, BAE-level contract, with a team option for the second season.
As an addendum, I was looking at recent Portland Trail Blazers teams to find ...
someone who compares to Roger Mason, Jr. on at least a stylistic level — as well as somewhat statistically pertaining to per-minute and pace-adjusted numbers — with Derek Anderson being the closest guy. Like Mason, Jr., Anderson was a tall 2/1 who worked best playing next to a non-pure point guard at the 1 — specifically that midget Damon Stoudamire — and brought stability to the backcourt when it came to handling and distributing the basketball. The one difference here is that Anderson was a better defensive player than Mason, Jr. is today, but on offense the similarities are there.
Yeah, but
Derek Anderson could only be counted on to play about 20 games a season, even though the stat sheet says he played all 82
I'm not saying that Derek Anderson wasn't without his faults, but rather ...
that Roger Mason, Jr. is a similar type of player as a tall, lanky 2/1 big guard.
Wesley Matthews can't play the 2 effectively in this offensive scheme, so my guess is Jerryd Bayless ...
will likely get a heavy workload at that spot as a backup combo guard. A second unit backcourt of Matthews and Bayless would make last year’s occasional duo of Rudy Fernandez and Bayless actually look good in comparison, which is saying something. For Matthews, he’ll ultimately be the primary backup for Nicolas Batum and be nothing more than an overpriced Martell Webster — who’s similarly below average overall — which’ll be to the disappointment of some folks around here with lofty expectations for him.
If Matthews becomes nothing more than Batum's backup he'll be traded next summer.
That would be a huge disappointment to the Blazers, which certainly didn’t envision paying him $33M for that role only.
I don’t know Matthews, but I’m pretty sure Nate, Chad, and Born don’t agree with you, or they wouldn’t have sold Paul Allen on going after him. That doesn’t mean you couldn’t be right, though. So we shall see.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 4, 2010 11:11 PM PDT up reply actions
If Matthews becomes nothing more than Batum’s backup he’ll be traded next summer.
I suspect the Blazers have a longer-term relationship in mind for Wesley. Again, the minutes distribution between Bayless and Matthews will fluctuate slightly from night to night, depending on matchups and game situations. I’d like to think that Roy and Batum are going to both play 30+ mpg for 82 games, but just in case they miss a few it will be a good thing to have WM at the backup 2-3 instead of having to rely on one of the rookies
Compared to Portland’s wing logjams of the last few years, the Jerryd/Wesley duel for PT at the 2 is a yawner. It’s a win either way because neither player is going to say “boo” if they don’t get their 25 minutes on any given night. Nate can tell them both to jst play hard, until it’s time to send the starters back in the game. MIke/Chad said the goal was to upgrade the team’s perimeter defense, and it certainly appears that they’ve done that
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
the money part sucks.
I’m looking forward to seeing Matthews being a good backup, though. Maybe he’s our 6th man?
But like two4larue said, Matthews will also back up Roy. Which is why I’m excited to have him on our team. And he, in my opinion, seems to be a downgraded 3 point shooter version of a consistent Webster. In other words, a dependable spot up shooter.
seems to be a downgraded 3 point shooter version of a consistent Webster
Martell has averaged 37% for his NBA career from behind the line, Matthews shot 37% last year. An argument could be made that Wesley will not shoot as well from deep in a Blazer uniform, but an equally strong argument could be made that Webster would have continued to struggle from distance if he was still in Portland, playing intermittent minutes behind Nic
I think we’ll have to see Matthews play alongside his new teammates to make a full evaluation of this signing, but it’s safe to say that he will be a better fit behind Roy-Batum than Martell, and more able to produce consistently in that role
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
haha.
sorry, I didn’t know that. also, it’s true that we have to wait and see how he fits with our system, and if he can do it well.
In a way, I was saying Martell was better at threes, but at the same time… idk.
Trust me when I say this: I’m kinda being nerdy by saying that (Matthews being a downgraded version of Webster). I said that because I play NBA 2k, and I noticed that Matthews’ 3pt rating is lower than Webster.
But nonetheless, I’m excited to see Matthews, and see if he would really do what he claims to do: work hard and show he’s worth the money we paid him.
Did you watch Mathews in the playoffs?
The guy is certainly an upgrade over Martell Webster. No knock on Martell…
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.
I'm not even more sure we need to get rid of Rudy just so Bayless can have even more minutes. Bayless
is such pro now. He isn’t down about minutes or trade talks, he realizes this is a business and his job is to be ready. I really like that. He has the attitude to be successful, and I love that he is always in attack mode no matter what. The rest of the team can be trying to protect the lead and play soft, but Bayless is going to the rim.
I noticed Batum pushing the ball in traffic on the break. That has me excited. A lot of players get scared and pull back, so nice to hear. Not sure he will be any good in the post, a nice jump hook like Pippen had would be nice.
Naive notion,
that Jarryd isn’t also playing for his next contract. He knows the score (just like the rest of us). You don’t wait until you’re an RFA, and hope for the best, simply because you never got a real shot. He’ll whine, or his agent will, but behind the scenes, as it should be. Besides. Jerryd is an emotional guy, very easy to read.
Yes, he’s an attacker, but you can’t attack if you’re not getting the minutes. And you have to be confident that Coach won’t pull you after your first TO. Rudy’s transgressions are a gift to young Bayless. This IS his big break, and the timing couldn’t be better for he and his agent.
There has been a lot of discussion about Rex, and many questions remain. Should he play 22-25 mpg, and create a true baseline for his offensive production, as well as his ability (or inability) to stay in front of other back-up PG’s, the discussion would settle out, as the truth would be plain to see.
by damonrayhymer on Sep 4, 2010 8:15 AM PDT up reply actions
Bayless has repeatedly asked behind the scenes for a bigger role, he just does it less publicly than Rudy and his agent
"Listening to the media only increases your odds of failing at whatever you are doing" - Mark Cuban
Jerryd joined the Blazers at a bad time
at least, it was bad for his early career development, because his minutes would be limited with Sergio, Rudy and Blake on the roster (not to mention #7) and the team made the jump during his rookie year to a 50 win team, which meant that developmental time was over and 20 year old rookie guards were going to have to “wait their turn”
To Bayless’ credit, he kept his head up and if he complained it wasn’t directly to the media (and in his blog he hasn’t mentioned any acrimony towards Nate re: his lack of PT) Portland signed Miller a year ago and that pushed Bayless to the “5th” guard so he didn’t even play for the first 5 games of the regular season. But when Rudy and Roy went down Rex was ready to ROWR and Dave illustrated in his memorable game recap of Portland’s victory over the Spurs (I think that was the game where Jerryd scored 21)
Even though Bayless’ minutes fluctuated over the rest of the year and he was called upon to play backup PG after the Camby deal, his shooting percentage improved and he looked more confident as the season went along, building to a climax of a better-than-expected performance in the post season, where he played in Phoenix but didn’t freeze up (or try to do too much) in front of his homies
It’s obvious Bayno is a Bayless believer—and why not? The two of them have worked a lot together for the past 2 years. Jerryd has a lot to learn about playing point and no one can say for sure if he’s the Blazer’s PGotF at this juncture, but it appears that he’s going to get the chance to prove his worth again, backing up Andre at the 1. I like mentally tough players, so it’s hard for me to root against Bayless, even though I can recognize his shortcomings (he’s too aggressive at the point of attack on both offense and defense, but I’d rather that a player make an aggressive mistake than never take any chances) I predicted that Bayless and Roy could become a terrific backcourt combo like Drexler and Porter were, as far back as July 2008, so I’d like to see if this concept starts to materialize this season, or if it was just a pipe dream.
It’s all up to Jerryd, I wouldn’t bet against him
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Similarly, I expect that Jerryd Bayless won't ultimately be satisfied as a backup combo guard in a ...
6th/7th man type role; thus, his long-term future will almost assuredly be somewhere besides Portland.
Well, that depends on who the Blazers get to replace Miller, and when
Everybody seems to have an opinion about the future starting Blazer PG (he needs to be a shooter/defender to fit well with Roy, etc) but ultimately the decision isn’t going to be made on the internet or the radio, but out on the hardwood. As much as NBA observers have already pigeon-holed Jerryd as an undersized SG, he did make steady progress last spring running Portland’s offense; he’s still very young and he’s yet to play the 2000th minute of his NBA career.
So we’ll see how the guard rotation unfolds, and how Bayless collaborates with Roy, Miller and Matthews. Bayno said the Blazers need Jerryd to “bust out” this year, and I’m looking forward to seeing what that will look like, in relation to the rest of the lineup
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
"Almost assuredly"
AK do you ever qualify any statement as a personal opinion? Do you make a distinction in your own mind between “opinions” and “facts”?
IMO, your apparent unwillingness to distinguish between the two limits the persuasiveness of your arguments. This comment is intended as a friendly suggestion.
Now to the substance of your comment. Given that Miller is 34, and given that the team has not brought a veteran PG in to compete with Bayless, it seems likely that Bayless is going to be given an opportunity to earn the position of starting PG. You may have doubts about the wisdom of the team taking that approach, but it seems likely that they don’t share your opinion about Bayless’ ceiling. What Bayless does with the opportunity remains to be seen, but the opportunity is there.
by upper left corner on Sep 5, 2010 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Or, to be more specific, a grammatical modifier.
Why, by the way, are we even having this discussion? I’m much, much more straightforward and forthcoming about how my comments are personal opinions more than most folks here, including you. So yeah, this is seemingly a hypocritical criticism on your end.
by AK1984 on Sep 5, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
In my experience....
…..having read thousands of your comments, you state almast every thought as a if it were an absolute. Shades of gray and qualifiers are not a staple of your commentary.
For example, you could have written your comment above like this:
“I don’t see Bayless as ever developing the skill-set needed to be a starter for the Blazers. I also suspect that he will never be satisfied in a 6th man role which leaves me questioning if his long-term future in Portland.”
It would have expressed the very same information as your statement above, but would have made it much clearer that you were basing the statement on your opinion rather than stating it as an “almost fact.”
by upper left corner on Sep 5, 2010 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions
This is very true.
I’m mostly used to it, but AK, the way you state your opinions often implies a wealth of supporting evidence that usually doesn’t exist.
Maybe put it in your sig or something, haha.
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
"[...] often implies a wealth of supporting evidence that usually doesn’t exist."
I frequently, yet not always use statistical evidence to substantiate my stance on something — such as my recent comparison of Jerryd Bayless to Louis Williams — yet, that aside, there are cases wherein one’s observation can’t be presented as an absolute fact for whatever reason, which is why it’s called an opinion in that case.
Regardless, I contend that I do as good as job as any — although I’m certainly not perfect, but nobody is that — in having my conclusion on a given topic founded via a sufficient process. Sometimes I’ll slip up and make a mistake, but I’d argue that my overall track record verifies my competence here.
Sorry, I didn't mean to say that you don't support your opinions, because you definitely do.
Anyway, I’m used to your strong ways of stating things now, and so it’s not my problem really (plus I doubt you’d change, as it is just a stylistic habit in all probability).
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
Yeah but the best part about AK
is that when he’s wrong you can really rub it in his face and he doesn’t get all offended. In fact he’ll straight up say “i was wrong and you were right”
None of which would be fun if he wasn’t so certain every oppinion he has is 100 percent correct.
for sure
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
That's it?
I ask you a serious question about the way you think and express yourself, and you respond with a flippant rejoinder?
Your proving my point. A little self-reflection and a little self-examination might result in less friction with others. I say this as someone who respects your knowledge, but finds your manner of discussion, “difficult.”
by upper left corner on Sep 5, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I'm flippant for a reason.
That’s because this asinine topic doesn’t really warrant my time. Heck, many folks find you “difficult” to debate with, too, but you don’t see me calling you out on it until provoked like this.
I also won’t forget how you continued to spout disinformation during the Jerryd Bayless debates — even after I’d shown how you were wrong about that injury nonsense apropos of Jawann McClellan — which still irks me to this very day.
So yeah, you’ve got flat-out no business calling me out here. None whatsoever, seriously.
by AK1984 on Sep 5, 2010 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not trying to call you out.
My apologies if it comes across that way. I’m trying to make a suggestion to a young person whose intelligence and knowledge I respect. My intent is not to embarrass or provoke, rather it is to cause you to reflect a bit on how you express yourself. What you do with the suggestion is clearly your business.
I am a middle-aged guy who hires a lot of young males to work for me. I often try to give guys a bit of advice in one area or another. If I have offended you, I am sorry.
by upper left corner on Sep 5, 2010 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions
No, I'm not that mad. It's just that, well, your criticism is without merit. Within ...
the comment in question, I used a qualifer in the word “almost” and you went off on an inane tangent about how I don’t make it know that my comments are based on observation and opinion rather than absolute fact. You, however, are entirely off base in your criticism of me and won’t concede that, which is a sign of obstinance by you.
It’s nothing personal, but your criticism is without merit and I discard it as useless tripe.
by AK1984 on Sep 5, 2010 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
The reason for my original comment....
Was that I saw three or four comments you had made today in several different threads. All of them shared this characteristic of stating an opinion with what struck me as an overabundance of certainty. It almost made me laugh, and then when I saw your comment above, I thought I would broach the subject with you. Obviously you aren’t ready, willing. or able to respond openly to my attempt at constructive criticism.
I do hope you will read my comment above entitled “In my experience.” I tried to give an example of what I am talking about. If you still think that my comments are “tripe” then feel free to reject them.
I am off to go pick up my grandson, so the conversation will have to end here.
by upper left corner on Sep 5, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions
He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought —
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
by HailOden! on Sep 5, 2010 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
I hear he might have been a pedophile
But I don’t have a preferred advanced stat or credible source to back that up…
Nevertheless, if you want to change the subject, interjecting a line from “Jabberwocky” is a sure fire way to redirect (read: awkwardly end) a conversation.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
every famous historical figure is now considered to have maybe been a pedophile or cross-dresser or gay
…seemingly just because. Course, in some cases it’s probably true, but does it even matter? They’re all dead now.
Anyway I like your style sir.
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
With regards to constructive criticism, I think you lack a keen sense ...
of self-awareness — which is admittedly nothing more than my opinion based on observation, so let me clairify that — otherwise, you’d recognize and openly acknowledge your own character trait of being a stiff-necked sort who’s relentless in persistently pushing their opinion on others in a seemingly overbearing manner of presentation.
Amusingly enough, we both possess that similar flaw of being resolute to the point of dogged bullheadedness. Yet, even though I’m strong-minded, outspoken, and occasionally ill-tempered, I do respect myself in coming to terms with and embracing those personality quirks — for self-awareness is key — as well as take pride in how I’ll usually concede when I’m wrong about a topic. I, too, enjoy how I’m a genuine person with a sharp sense of self, which is even despite the rough edges — such as the brash, candid style in which I express myself — that comes with the territory of me being me.
For example, I didn’t expect that Kevin Durant would improve so drastically on team defense heading into last season. Durant did that, though, which leaves only his poor handles and inferior court vision as fatal flaws in his game. I also prognosticated that the Dallas Mavericks could challenge for a championship last season, but that clearly didn’t end up being the case.
In the end, ultimately, I guess I that don’t value your criticisms of me in any considerable way, as I feel you haven’t shown the ability and/or desire to take a good long look in the proverbial mirror, analyze your own flaws — for nobody’s perfect — and take ownership of them. Until then, my view on this is that you’re someone who’s essentially telling another individual to clean up their own mess — which, in this instance, is me and my alleged “unwillingness to distinguish between the two limits the persuasiveness of your arguments” — without getting their junk in order first.
To bring this whole racket back around, though, I’m still irritated about how you’re way off base in questioning whether or not I “qualify any statement” of mine — since the word “almost” appeared in the original comment that came into question — however, you haven’t admitted how your criticism is baseless due to my use of the aforementioned qualifier to start with there.
I doubt you’ll concede that point, with a bolded and italicized accentuation on the qualifier (i.e., “doubt”) for good measure. Who knows, though? Not I, man, that’s for sure. Shoot, this one’s on you; the ball is in your figurative court.
It would be interesting to have you reread this comment in about 25 years
I’m 52. I have done many things in my life. Some have been spectacular successes, some have been both public and private failures. I have met a President in the Oval Office, been thanked personally by Nelson Mandela. I was in the middle of a revolution in Central America. I have been a lobbyist in three different states, served as Administrator of the Senate Human Resources Committee in the Oregon State Senate. I’ve built a million dollar business.
I have also known the pain of a failed marriage and struggled to be a good father in spite of it. I have experienced the incredibly humbling experience of being a step-parent to three children. I lived with the reality of having a sister murdered and watching my father fight a loosing eleven year battle with cancer. I have learned to come to grips with my failure to ever pursue a lifelong ambition of become an elected politician. In the past two years, I’ve dealt with loosing over $1million dollars of net worth that took decades of work to build……
Life tends to be humbling and teach all of us a bit of perspective. I realize that many young people don’t want to listen to some older person speak about the wisdom that comes with age, so I won’t bother. I will say that life is a constant process of self-evaluation and re-invention. I’m far from perfect, and my assumption is that everyone else is too.
You are correct that we share a certain faith in the “right-ness” of our opinions. Perhaps that is part of the reason that I took the trouble to have this discussion with you. You are bright, intelligent, and willing to put your ideas forward. I admire those qualities. In my experience, there is a fine line between confidence and arrogance. I suspect that we both need to be aware of this reality.
I genuinely wish you well, and enjoy reading your comments. I’m sorry that my attempt at constructive criticism was not viewed as constructive.
by upper left corner on Sep 6, 2010 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions
The reason I dismissed your criticisms of me isn't because of ...
your age, experience, et cetera — for it wouldn’t matter if you’re 15 or a 105, nor would I care if you’re affluent and world-renowned or destitute and obscure — rather, I got ticked off due to what I thought was an utterly groundless, as well as hypocritical diatribe that was presented in a smug, preachy manner.
I mean, heck, I’ve got a fair amount flaws, but I’ll argue vehemently that I view things in shades of grey rather than in black and white — even if I’m steadfast in my opinion and tactless in how I state it — and, moreover, do my damnedest to understand the perspective of those of whom who disagree with me on a given topic.
I also straddle the middle at times and am ambivalent about many subjects, so not every position of mine is one extreme or the other. Also, in cases wherein my opinion is far outside the majority and is unlikely to be put into real-life practice, I view them as pie in the sky ideas worth contemplating just for the heck of it. That doesn’t mean I expect anything to come of it, though.
So yeah, I’m cool if you want to criticize me for actual flaws of mine — such as being rude, abrasive, and strong-willed almost to a fault — for I’m not above reproach. I just get vexed whenever somebody makes an invalid criticism of me that’s ill-founded, which I deemed to be the case here.
As it is, I often use qualifiers when stating opinions. I don’t claim to be some basketball guru with divine basketball knowledge who’s word is gospel — while I also hope that nobody thinks of me in that way, for I don’t want to have the burden being an influential person — as I’m nothing more than a run-of-the-mill observer of the game.
When it’s all said and done, you, I, and everyone else who posts here is on the exact same footing; plus, each and every individual reader and poster can uniquely judge whose opinions — amongst fellow posters, of course — that they put more stock in comment by comment. Around here, there’s some people who like me, some people who dislike me, and others who don’t know me. The same goes for you, too, as well as everyone else, for nobody’s special.
Also, in cases wherein my opinion is far outside the majority and is unlikely to be put into real-life practice, I view them as pie in the sky ideas worth contemplating just for the heck of it. That doesn’t mean I expect anything to come of it, though.
I can appreciate this. “Out of the box” thinking doesn’t indicate a lack of BB knowledge, but rather a willingness to contemplate the possibilities. (As remote as they may be…)
When it’s all said and done, you, I, and everyone else who posts here is on the exact same footing; plus, each and every individual reader and poster can uniquely judge whose opinions — amongst fellow posters, of course — that they put more stock in comment by comment.
This is true more so for some than others. I certainly don’t “keep score” re: who was right/wrong re: various comments in the past, unless a Bedger gets in my face about something.
At the end of the day we aren’t changing anybody’s minds (who matter) re: the past/present/future state of the Blazers (or any other subject) by sharing our opinions here. It’s a pastime, and entertainment. We must derive some pleasure from it, or else we’d spend our time doing something else. That’s my expectation, and my only commitment is to
keep telling it like I see it (or sharing Blazer-related info that I’ve heard/read) regardless if I’m considered “credible” or not.
Strong takes = equally strong responses. If everyone always agreed about everything then I suspect that BE would not be nearly as popular
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Yeah, we're all mostly strong-willed people here who'll ...
often only change our opinions on a given topic after there’s incontrovertible evidence. In most cases, though, the topics at hand here are based on basketball related concepts and philosophies rather than indisputable facts, which is what leads to the contrasting outlooks and occasional debates.
How do you know this?
Has this been reported in the media? Do you have inside connections? I’m not disagreeing, just wonder the basis for your statement.
by upper left corner on Sep 5, 2010 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't have a link
but Norsk never lies. Bayless quietly requested either a trade or a bigger role shortly before Rudy had surgery (thanks to injuries and trading away Blake, he got the latter). Seemed to have been overblown by the media, but where there is smoke, there is usually fire. However, I don’t think that means Bayless will be discontent in the future, necessarily. He seems to be fine backing up/learning from Miller for as long as Miller is the better player.
According to some small-time beat reports, Bayless thought that he could be doing more to help the team, much like virtually every other young PG with comparable talents, and that if he was not going to be given the opportunity to help the team, he wanted to go to a team that could use him.
Later, after the Camby trade, someone asked him specifically about how he was feeling about his role, having intimated discontent in the past, and Bayless expressed that his problem was with not understanding what the team wanted out of him (off the bench scorer? Roy’s back-up? Miller’s back-up?PGotF?), and that he was content once it became clear that his role was to be Miller’s back-up.
I thought most of this was common knowledge. It was talked about some at the time he asked for the trade, and was in a fanshot, iirc.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
If a player is any good at all, he's going to express a desire to help the team more
especially if he’s playing on a deep team and his PT has been limited
As others have reminded us, Batum has also made comments about how he’s been used by Nate in the past. The head coach has said (like all head coaches will say) that he understands the tension when players aren’t getting as many opportunities as they think they deserve, and that this kind of dialogue is healthy. In fact, when the player starts to accept his (minor) role and doesn’t battle for more minutes it’s time for the team to be concerned about his future.
But there’s a far cry between this normal, behind the scenes questioning of roles and usage and the perpetual complaints to the Spanish press that Fernandez has made over the past few years. This distinction is so stark that it shouldn’t have to be explained. And there’s a difference between what Webster’s agent did (going back channel to suggest that it wouldn’t be in Martell’s best career interest to play short minutes behind Batum) and the threats that Andy Miller gave very publicly to the Blazers this summer. The front office of any team is going to try to accommodate the player’s request in either event, but it makes the GM’s job much more difficult if the demand is noisy and shared with virtually every media outlet available.
So let’s not bake all of the Blazer’s young bench players in the same pie. One of these guys is clearly not like the others re: how he’s gone about his business
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Was that directed at me?
Because your comment seems a little out of context. You seem imply that I’m lumping Bayless in with Rudy as whiners, when I clearly have not, going so far as to explain that he seems/claims to be content with his role. Nor does your comment seem to apply to Norsk, who merely pointed out that Bayless does, in fact, clamor from time to time for a bigger role, just in a more professional manner than Rudy, that in no way suggests that he is dieing to get out of P-town.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
I was making a general distinction between the way the players have reacted to their roles/usage
to answer your question, I was probably replying to both of you.
Like I said, you never want a player to become completely content with his role, they should be hungry to contribute more, and always ready to play more at any time that it’s required. But a line is crossed when the player or his agent “go public” with PT/role discontent, and then make demands that the player be traded. Clearly, Bayless and Batum have not come anywhere near this line.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I also don't have a link, but I have the same memory as HailOden.
Bayless expressed his disappointment quite candidly with some beat reporter over the chances he had had thus far in the NBA, seeming to insinuate just wanting to play regardless of the team.
I also agree that it was blown out of proportion and either Nate, Kevin, or Larry acknowledged this yearning from Bayless and said that it was one of the reasons they liked him so much: he really wanted to make a difference and help whatever team he was on however he could on the court.
That is my shaky memory of the facts.
On your side of things, it isn’t really something to be defensive about as we all (BEdge’s collective) generally thought it was a positive that he wanted to do something good so badly.
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Rudy’s transgressions are a gift to young Bayless. This IS his big break, and the timing couldn’t be better
Bayless isn’t going to be getting many minutes at SG if Matthews plays well. They didn’t blow their MLE on Matthews to just play behind Batum for 16-18 minutes a game. Bayless will get a few of the 11-12 minutes available at backup SG but mostly he has to show he can play the 14-16 minutes at PG behind Miller (and eventually take over at PG) if he expects to be here beyond this year.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 4, 2010 1:23 PM PDT reply actions
^^ reply to damonrayhymer
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 4, 2010 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions
On paper, you're probably right.
Once the season starts, and we start incurring our regular regimen of bumps and bruises, they’ll be plenty of time for Jerryd.
Plus, Miller is a notoriously slow starter, and Coach could use Bayless to give Dre a kick in the rear, which isn’t necessarily a bad idea. Miller is a terrific asset, but motivating him in Nov & Dec is a tricky proposition.
by damonrayhymer on Sep 5, 2010 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions
There are 5 key players in the rotation for 1-2-3 positions (Miller, Roy, Batum, Bayless, Matthews)
That’s 144 minutes a night (48 × 3) for the PG-SG-SF combined
Divide that by 5 and it comes out to 28.8 per player, if they’re all healthy
This is not a huge problem. Now, if the pie has to be sliced up 6 ways (Rudy) then that’s another matter altogether. Sure, Cunningham’s going to get some minutes at the 3, but he’s not a ‘key’ rotation player unless the other team plays a big lineup or there’s foul trouble (which will automatically cut into another player’s PT, anyway)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
28.8
Roy and Miller shouldn’t average more than that until the 60 game mark, but they probably will.
Assuming Roy, Dre, and Batum (who is a maybe), all average 30, That still leaves 23 mpg for Rex & Mathews, and that is assuming that everyone is healthy.
This looks like a strong rotation, where both Wesley and Jerryd will have plenty of opportunity, Jerryd is to prove his value, and Wesley to justify his contract.
by damonrayhymer on Sep 6, 2010 7:25 AM PDT up reply actions
For this team to succeed, Brandon Roy must be healthy and playing about 36 to 38 minutes ...
per game throughout the regular season. Portland isn’t in the position of San Antonio, which can afford to play its big three an average of between 28 and 32 minutes per game.
As it stands, I fully expect that Wes Matthews’ playing time will be primarily as the backup 3 — which ought to give him approximately 20 minutes per game behind Nicolas Batum — while the roughly 24 backup backcourt minutes per game go mostly to Jerryd Bayless. If Roy rests for the last 5 to 6 minutes of the 1st and 3rd quarters and Miller rests for the first 5 to 6 minutes of the 2nd and 4th quarters, that’ll give Bayless between 20 and 24 minutes per game.
Now, as you can see, I don’t expect much of anything out of Dante Cunningham, Luke Babbitt, Elliot Williams, or Armon Johnson, although they may each get spot minutes. Yet, in the case of Williams and Johnson, I wouldn’t mind seeing one of them get an extended D-League run — particularly Williams — like Patty Mills did last season. Oh, and with regards to pick-and-pop 4 Cunningham and stretch 4 Babbitt, their best bet for playing time is probably if/when foul trouble occurs for any one of Portland’s main three frontline players (i.e., Greg Oden, LaMarcus Aldridge, and Marcus Camby), but they shouldn’t be full-time rotational players. Lastly, Jeff Pendergraph should only play if there are major injury issues; though, in that case, the team is likely screwed anyhow.
Why can't we be like SA, and play for a title, not every regular season game?
I don’t understand this AK:
For this team to succeed, Brandon Roy must be healthy and playing about 36 to 38 minutes … per game throughout the regular season.
I totally disagree. Given Brandon’s knees, he clearly needs to have his time reduced during the regular season if he is going to have anything left for the post-season!
And
Portland isn’t in the position of San Antonio, which can afford to play its big three an average of between 28 and 32 minutes per game
Why aren’t we in the position of SA? We don’t have injured players that we have to treat carefully? We’re not trying to win a title? We don’t have any depth?
I don’t get it. If we can keep everybody’s minutes below 30 (especially Roy, Oden, Camby, Miller), they will all be so much fresher during the playoffs. And, it builds a deeper, more injury-resistant team, and gives the rookies and bench players a chance to pick their game up.
If you want to ride a horse off into the sunset, don’t go full speed the first 1/2 mile of the day…
I can't speak on AK's behalf
but one might say that a young team like ours can’t just “flip a switch” come playoffs, to use the analogy that became popular this past season, like the L*kers, Celtics, and Spurs can. We still have some guys in important roles who need the experience, especially playing next to Brandon and Greg.
But even that doesn’t preclude playing the starters limited minutes to begin the season, play them more heavily during the mid-season, then rest them more the last week or two.
Also, we might consider playoff seeding as a motivating factor. You might also want to showcase your best players as much as possible during the regular season, to give David Stern something to market, that way the referee conspiracy doesn’t kill you when you face K*be or the Heat.
I’m not saying I agree with any of these, but I think they would make possible arguments for keeping the starters playing big minutes.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
To put it rather simply, things like team cohesion and putting up a good enough ...
regular season record to assure home court advantage for as long as possible are very important for the Portland Trail Blazers. As of yet, this ballclub is in no position to rest its starters periodically like the San Antonio Spurs or flip a switch like the Boston Celtics did last season — which I doubt will happen again this time around — since these guys need to be gung-ho from start to finish. Let’s hope that the finish is further along than last season, as well.
But the point is - what are we playing for?
I disagree with your premise that “putting up a regular season record to assure HCA” REQUIRES BRoy to play 38 mpg!
This is a very talented and deep team, and their two franchise level players (Greg and Roy) have injury history… I don’t care what their age is, their bodies are old…. You need to reduce their mpg to increase games played!
If we just want to get out of the first round, then sure, wear Brandon’s knees down by playing him 36-38 mpg (shudder)… That should ensure we’re in the top 4 slots and get HCA for round 1… Whoopee!
I’d also disagree with your team cohesion point. In fact, given Brandon’s recent propsensity for untimely injury, I thnk it’s critical that this team learns to have confidence to run an offense and win without BRoy on the court!
Keep our stars fresh and give our bench significant playing time, to find out who should be in that 8-9 man playoff rotation.
The mindset, strategy, and tactics should all be targeted toward winning a championship, not the first round…
I think your points are valid
injuries are part of any ball players career, but conditioning, and overuse can be controlled. Roy has been overused extensively in Nate’s system and to be honest Roy has been part of his own demise. His comfort zone put the ball in his hands (even when the play was first started) He controlled the pace for himself, and the rest of the team supported his pace.
Lots of comments in here about Roy’s defense. He is an average defender but gets to be a downright liability primarily because he works so hard on offense, he has little energy left to defend.
Roy needs more of his teammates to help carry the load. This is easily observable when you watch the team play. I am hoping the maturity level of this team has advanced enough to be more comfortable with an evolving philosophy and smarter wiser approach.
As for Oden…well he’s another story all-together. He’s an old bodied young man (like you said) that is caught between a rock and a hard place. He needs playing minutes and deciding how to play him won’t be that easy.
Since I am just a fan that can comment without consequences, I would get him on the court as soon as he is pronounced fit and play him at a steady pace. I think it’s time to find out one way or the other, if this guy will be an intricate part of this team. He has already lost valuable minutes of playing time in his basketball career that can’t be retrieved.
Durability is an often overlooked ingredient in a player’s profile. It can be a difficult judgment call when you have a talented player that is often injured. But this player does you no good on the sidelines and small moves towards playing minutes can leave you in limbo for a longer period. This state of limbo could compromise your time line in the process of becoming that elite team that can contend. Sadly contending and/or getting to the next level, likely depends on Oden’s health.
If he can get injured so often in the small amount of time he has played, then betting people, who play the odds, will likely consider hedging. I think most will agree that this guy possesses the fate of this team, in the short haul, but loading up for the long haul, banking on his health, is an even greater odds breaker…Some tough decisions may soon be imminent (even though another major injury will make that decision a lot easier)
[Good defense "releases" your offense]
Roy is going to play his 35-36
I didn’t intend to give the impression that an even distribution of minutes at the 1-2-3 was ever going to happen, I was just using that division as an example of how many minutes there actually are available. Obviously, if Roy plays 6-7 minutes more than 28.8, those 6-7 minutes are going to have to be deducted from another player’s total, most likely Bayless or Matthews.
The debate is how many of the 11-12 mpg that Roy will be off the floor will go to Jerryd vs Wesley, and I say it will depend upon the matchups and game situation on any given night. I expect Bayless and Matthews to receive average per game minutes somewhere in the low 20s, but their usage could spike upwards if Roy or Batum miss games due to injury
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I'm so excited to see this team at full strength,
that blowouts are on my mind, especially in the RG. That will moderate the minutes played to a certain degree.
So bring on those pesky Warriors, T-Wolves, and bring on the 76’ers. Rebuilding teams welcome.
by damonrayhymer on Sep 6, 2010 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions
that blowouts are on my mind, especially in the RG. That will moderate the minutes played to a certain degree.
It’s always nice when blowouts happen (like in the spring of ‘09) but unfortunately you can’t plan ahead for them
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
A single game, sure, but over the course of an 82-game season...
I can absolutely project double-digit blowouts by this deep, athletic squad… Roy should not be playing a single minute of at least 10 fourth quarters in games this year… so, I agree with drh…
I hope you're right
and I hope these random games are spaced well, so he’ll get the optimum benefit from the extra rest
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
just like in baseball
you can’t prepare ahead of time to rest your pitching staff for an entra-inning game
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Another season of hope
and counting chickens ahead of time. The roster is still loaded with the unproven and no real identity. I still would not land too much of my hope on Bayless, Mathews or even Batum, for that matter. However, Batum is a well rounded player and has all the tools, including good BBIQ. He just fits and would fit on any team. But consistency and team cohesiveness is what is needed, and lack of it will likely opt us out in the playoffs again.
The “robotic” play is predictable and will need plenty of new variations and overall mindset change to get the monkey off of Nate’s back. (His breakout year?) When you are interested in taking care of the ball, you can’t be so entrenched that you suffocate your team into mindless robots.We simply have to take better advantage of and also create new opportunities to keep defense’s honest. Automatic slow down is an energy killer and can’t be our only offensive approach.
So if you start to talk about breakout years for Batum and Bayless you really need to hang that on the whole team and coaching staff. I believe these two players can be effective, but the environment will not be built around them, so they have to have some “alternative” play to allow a better contribution from them..
Also when I say unproven, I am not talking about individuals or a stat column…this is a team sport and coming together as a team will always have the most merit towards the progression to the next level. Coaching will have its place and will be one of the key elements in making this happen.
It will also be interesting to see how well the team gets out of the blocks this year and develops an identity that can carry them through both injuries and offensive lapses. (depending on the outside shot can be as unstable as it is productive)
However, all this said, everything might change in a hurry if Oden is healthy and plays a lot of good productive minutes. This team’s real future is clearly all about him. A big man that can anchor the defense and make the inside play a significant part of your offense will go a long ways towards building an identity that is less predictable and much more viable..
[Good defense "releases" your offense]
Of course, all of the players will need to come together, and play as a team
I completely understand the criticisms of Nate and his coaching style. I also think that to focus on it as the reason the players won’t succeed is futile, for the simple fact that McMillian will coach the Blazers this year, and in the playoffs. There is a 1% chance that his health or a complete collapse will cause Nate to resign or be fired during the season, but the odds are so minuscule that they’re not worth spending time discussing.
I’m not landing my hope on the improvement of Bayless, Batum or any of the young players. I do expect them to improve, and I hope the team comes together as a whole and advances in the playoffs. If they can, then Nate’s contract will likely be extended, and I’ll have future opportunities to read (and listen to) how his rigid coaching style is holding back his players and turning them into “mindless robots”. It comes with the territory.
I’m also hopeful that the changes to the assistant coaching staff will help Nate and the players to improve their post season results. Time will tell. I certainly don’t think there’s a cause to be pessimistic about the Blazers chances this coming season. They caught some bad breaks last year and once they have their entire roster healthy they should have a dominant front court rotation and improved perimeter defense. These factors bode well for playoff success, no matter what offense or style a team runs.
Better defense and rebounding will lead to more transition opportunities, and (despite complaints to the contrary) I don’t think Nate has any problem letting the players run out and complete fast break baskets before the defense has the chance to set up.
Could this style be encouraged more by the coaching staff? Sure, but it all starts on the defensive end, so the focus should be there. A healthy Oden, Camby and Przybilla should help, but ball hawks like Bayless, Batum and Matthews are an upgrade, as well. If these guys are getting a few more fast break lay-ins a game, a lot of the concerns re: the half court offense are going to evaporate.
At least, until the post season. In the playoffs the game changes, and half court execution will be critical. This is why I’m advocating players like Miller, Camby and Oden be on the floor at the same time, as much as possible. A dominant Greg will put extreme pressure on the opposing big men and the best players to make sure he receives the ball in a position to score are Andre and Marcus. They are the vets with the best court vision and they have the creativity and confidence to make the risky entry passes that will lead to dunks (and FT opportunities for #52)
So there will be a few things for Nate and the coaches to work on, this season. Speculation about who might be a better coach for Portland should be left in the peripheral, IMO. Let’s work with what we’ve got, because what we’ve got is the best that we’ve had in 10+ years
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
You seem to think that I don't think they
have a chance with Nate as coach, but It is really quite different than that. I actually don’t think a coaching change will do much towards getting to the next level. My interest is entirely focused on getter better and learning from your history. This is not just done by adding and subtracting players, it is done by understanding your players and how you can best utilize their skills into a viable and fundamentally sound team. For the most part, Nate has done a pretty good job of helping this team get it done. But the path is always going to be full of roadblocks that steer you away from what you are trying to achieve. (Injuries included). Today the team is at the crossroads of getting to the next level. Many will draw their own conclusions as to what will get them there. I’m just saying that there might still be several missing pieces.
They are somewhat vested in what they now have, and it would make little sense to start over, even if they bombed this year. Practical solutions should be at the forefront and I’m sure a coaching change would not be taken lightly by PA . After all, they felt they had the best one available (in Nate) when they chose him and I thought so, as well.
In Nate, I’m just looking for an honest approach (each season) with the idea of improving team play and molding your current players into a unit that promotes this. Nate has had issues with players (Miller) and issues with adjustments to his preferred style of play. In other words he has put most of his eggs in the same basket and appears willing to live or die with it. This gives me cause for concern about Nate. Not that he is a bad coach, but simply because he has little flexibility with his players .
Individual iso’s can make spectators out some of the players and was Ok in the short term, especially when you build around a player like Roy. But half court play (with few variables) is predictable and therefore more defensible.
I’m sure most everyone sees the game differently and if they wish, can offer their perspective towards improving the play….Sure it is a lot easier to be an armchair coach and make comment without having to “own” the consequences. But all I have offered is a perspective that is different than yours. We have a playing style that we appreciate and we will not likely come into agreement on that account.
On paper we should be a better team..more balanced, more experienced and deep. I just realize that getting to the higher levels and evolving into a championship contender is out yonder and if and when our opportunity arises, it will likely have several different faces in the team photo.
I guess I could be considered somewhat of a skeptical person by nature….but I was not born that way, I have lived enough of life to realize that most skepticism proves itself out (history wise.) I am no basketball wizard, but I can recognize a special team when I see it. I’m not saying the current edition of the Blazers couldn’t be special, but I am saying they are not there yet. It could be worse (and it has been) but having all the pieces fall into place to have it happen are less likely rather than more likely. Thats just the way it is. You can say our chances are great and feel better, but I can also say our chances are fair and be pleasantly surprised if they do better than expected. Seeing is believing and I won’t cop my bet when they prove me wrong.
[Good defense "releases" your offense]
Good stuff, sorry that I misread your intent
Individual iso’s can make spectators out some of the players and was Ok in the short term, especially when you build around a player like Roy. But half court play (with few variables) is predictable and therefore more defensible.
I agree with this, and the Blazer’s halfcourt offense has been easy to defend in the post season. Does this mean that they need to scrap the Roy 1-4 ISO forever? It shouldn’t. But (as Channing Frye said) the Blazers were predictable in their half-court offense and the Suns were prepared and knew what was coming, for the most part. Some of this had to do with Roy not being 100%, but another reason was the coaching staff did have enough counter strategies to go to when Phoenix doubled LMA on the left block. We can blame Aldridge for his retreat and wild passing when the trap came, but some of the culpability has to go to the coaching staff for not preparing him better, or adjusting to this tactic.
Nate changed his coaching staff in part because of this playoff failure. When he commented on it he didn’t throw Dean (etc) under the bus, but that was the impression I received, reading between the lines. I’m hopeful that the Bs (Bernie, Bob and Buck) will have better answers and suggestions, but it remains to be seen how much different the offense will look, and how they will integrate Miller and Oden into the attack. I was just starting to get excited about this combo right before Greg went down, and all of the best-laid plans that McMillian had in mind last fall went out the window, as his roster was decimated and the team was reduced to survival mode.
Nate will be evaluated at the end of this coming season. The easy answer is “if the team doesn’t advance past the first round, Allen/Cho will go in a different direction…” but the solution is more complicated than that. A lot depends on how the team progresses in their half court versatility and execution (as well as other areas) I don’t anyone is saying that status quo (personnel or playbook-wise) is going to be good enough to reach the finals, and I suspect that some of the players (looking at you, LMA) are going to have to make some adjustments (fewer shot attempts) to help make the team more difficult to defend, next April/May
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
1:4 ISO Not gone forever... just used less frequently...
The Roy 1-4 ISO is a great weapon – for ONE possession. In fact, I’d be fine with them going 1-4 ISO at the end of each quarter, all year long… as long as they didn’t use it again until under 3:00 left in the 4th…
Nate changed his coaching staff in part because of this playoff failure.
Debatable… equally plausible reasons are
1) because he was told this was his last year unless he won a playoff series, and he wanted to go out with his guys… or
2) because once a couple of guys left, Nate started looking, and then figured he could get a lot of his guys on board, and now that a transition was already happening, let’s make it a big one…
or 3) PA told him to.
The reason I make this point is that I don’t give Nate the benefit of the doubt of being able to examine his short-comings, and be willing to correct them. I fear he brought in yes men that will give us even more rigid Sarge and less flexibility… I sure hope I’m wrong, but nothing I’ve seen yet from Nate tells me I should be optimistic…
how is Bob Oceipka Nate's "yes" man?
Or Buck Williams, for that matter?
I understand why you think that Nate won’t learn from his mistakes, but his roster has changed in the past 5 years and he’s had to make some adjustments for his new players from year to year. (He also had to learn how to win games without Brandon for a month, last winter/spring.) So while his system looks similar, there are wrinkles to it, and while it looks like it’s the wrong system for players like Rudy (etc) that doesn’t mean it should all be thrown out and revamped. (There is a benefit to continuity from the returning player’s viewpoint, they know what to expect, etc)
I listened to several offseason interviews from Nate (and others) and what I’ve gathered is that he was never told to change his staff (believe it, or don’t) When Monty was hired by NO Nate knew he had to shake things up, and he said that he didn’t think his previous staff had the right “balance” (or something like that) The biggest surprise was when he let Dean go, I don’t think any of us could have predicted that, even 4-5 months ago. Replacing Demo with Bernie as his lead asst signals a change (to me) and it could result in increased tempo, but probably not a huge difference. Oceipka reminds me of Mike Schuler, he’s a lifetime asst who should bring some new PnR strategy that the team desperately needs. We’ll see how much of a difference these new ideas make after camp and during the preseason.
I’m not going to get too geeked up about the new coaches (even though Buck is one of my fav Blazers, ever) but they should ensure that Nate’s system won’t be status quo. It’s inevitable. The changes may be subtle, but they’ll be there. Roy has said some encouraging things like “being the star doesn’t mean you get your way all the time” which makes me think he’ll be more receptive to playing off the ball (not 100% of the time, of course) and that could lead to more half court movement and unpredictability for the defense
The proof is in the pudding, as they say. Once the games start we can comment on the improvements or lament that things haven’t changed, but I’m willing to give Nate the benefit of the doubt for 2009-2010 because (even though the team got off to a tepid start…) he didn’t have a chance to ever settle into any kind of steady lineup or rhythm for very long, and still they won 50 games. If Brandon is shooting his same 16 shots mainly off of ISOs and LMA is still getting his 15 apg off of inefficent jumpers and post fadeaways in December, then we’ll revisit this debate
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I'm not sure how to interpret Brandon's comments this summer.
Roy has said some encouraging things like "being the star doesn’t mean you get your way all the time" which makes me think he’ll be more receptive to playing off the ball (not 100% of the time, of course)
Seems like his comments run the gamut of just about all possible roles for himself. For instance (from the Oregonian) he said,
Right now I’m really focusing on some individual things I want to do out there on the court. I’m trying to learn to play off the ball a little more. And of course, continue to get better at my strength, which is playing with the basketball.
Play off the ball more? Check
Get better at his strength, which is playing with the ball? Check
So there’s a number of things I’m going to talk to coach (Nate McMillan) about and putting me in different positions, so that way we can go bigger, put maybe Nicolas and Wesley out there together.
Roy, Matthews and Nic at PG, SG, SF? Check
And when asked directly about playing PG he said:
Q: Like having you play more point guard, with Matthews at the two and Batum at the three?
A: Yeah, I hope so. Like I said, I’m working a lot off the ball. But my strength is playing with that basketball and I’m trying to make sure I get even better at it.
He seems at least as interested in playing PG as playing off the ball more. Plus he’s apparently leaned down a lot. That could simply be to put less stress on his knees or hamstring, or to be a little more athletic getting to the hoop, but it is also consistent with wanting to be a little quicker at the point position.
I’m not trying to start a Brandon at PG debate. I rather just wait and see what develops. It would be interesting to know if he and Nate have already talked about any changes in his role however. If I had to guess it would be that he plays a little more off the ball and a little more as a PG (with Nic and Wesley), but neither will become a major role change in his game.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 8, 2010 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions
The other quote I remember
Is when he said during summer league “being the star means not getting your way all the time”
This could be taken to mean all kinds of different things, but I think that it’s refreshing to hear, coming off last fall when Roy “chose sides” re: the Miller-Blake debate. Then after Steve was traded and Brandon sat at watched with his sore hammy, he made some comments about how he now understood what Miller was talking to him about and how the 2 of them could play off of each other. They were just starting to get that synergy working and then Artest stepped on Roy’s foot and ruined the Blazers chances of post season success
I know that you remain unconvinced, based on the team’s 2-9 record against >500 reams during this period. But I had a good feeling about the team’s chances in the first round last April until that untimely injury. If they had played the Suns (or one of the other 2-5 seeds) with a healthy Roy and a reasonably-healthy Camby/Batum, I think Portland could have gotten over the hump. Then, depending on their 2nd round opponent, perhaps all the way to the WCF. I know, if candies and nuts were wishes…but a lot of this offseason angst was based on the poor ending during the Sun’s series (not to mention the pending KP decision and Oden’s lingering injury uncertainty) and that fallout is coloring the fan’s expectations of the current roster. It’s OK to take a cautious approach, but I for one am glad that Cho has resisted the urge to make the big splash deal.
If it’s not there, then it doesn’t hurt to pull the ball back out and run some time off the clock. At midseason Rich and the rest of us should have more data to make a better decision, and the trade offers could be better
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Just for the record, once Roy was hurt the Phoenix series was a mismatch as far as I was concerned.
So it meant very little to me and little angst, other than Rudy’s bizarre behavior and Nate’s lack of ability to make adjustments during a playoff series for the 2nd year in a row. We weren’t going to win regardless of what Nate did, but his complete lack of instituting counter moves (to LMA being double teamed and Miller being guarded by a 37 year old relic) is a continuing concern of mine for future playoff success.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 8, 2010 5:28 PM PDT up reply actions
We weren’t going to win regardless of what Nate did, but his complete lack of instituting counter moves (to LMA being double teamed and Miller being guarded by a 37 year old relic) is a continuing concern of mine for future playoff success.
I thought the beat-up Blazers did well to win 2 against Phoenix, considering the mismatch. I also got the impression from listening to Nate’s interviews that he made changes to his coaching staff because he has the same concerns that you do. Sure, Monty Williams was a big loss, but as far as experience goes Bickerstaff+Oceipka > Demo+Prunty. We’ll see how much of a difference they all make soon enough, but Nate’s final exam will be in late April, as always
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Regarding Nate McMillan and assistant coaches, I stand by this remark.
“While Nate McMillan was head coach of the Seattle SuperSonics, Bob Weiss on his staff. Weiss, by the way, had been with the Sonics franchise through a portion of George Karl’s reign and all of Paul Westphal’s short tenure; thus, he wasn’t an outside hire by Nate McMillan, but rather an organizational guy. Regarding Weiss, he came from an up-tempo, flex offense background — which he installed when he took over for McMillan after "Sarge" left for Portland, although it failed miserably — however, the man known then as "Mr. Sonic" was who he was in spite of having this grizzled veteran on his coaching staff.
In the end, ultimately, my point here is that McMillan will never change his ways—no matter who’s on his coaching staff. McMillan is who he is at this point, end of story."
http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/6/3/1499258/thibodeau-nixes-hornets#38950692
Also, here’s a comment of mine from 8/3/2009 — which was way before the start of the 2009-2010 season — wherein I made this as of yet 100% correct prediction.
“As long as Nate McMillan is guiding the ship, y’all are having a pie in the sky pipe dream if you folks think the Portland Trail Blazers’ pace won’t be in the bottom fifth of the NBA.”
This following paragraph was a part of that same comment, too.
“Oddly, the slow-paced nature of McMillan’s system is one of the few things I like about him. If anything, y’all should complain about his obtuse, thick-skulled mindset when it comes to not making necessary on the fly adjustements.”
http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/8/2/973499/lets-talk-about-martell-webster#19144921
Things aren’t going to change this season, either, regardless of countless people’s misguided optimism that should be replaced with blunt realism.
You and Nate have something in common (guess what it is?)
Don’t fixate on McMillian, he definitely made adjustments during the season last year, tat enable the team to produce 50 wins despite all the injuries. The comparison we were discussing (above) was between the coaching experience of Bickerstaff and Oceipka versus Demopolous and Prunty—especially during the post season.
You can go back in your archives and pull stats all night long for these gentlemen’s former teams and where they ranked, but there were different players on those team, the rosters had diverse strengths and weaknesses and Nate’s new assistants were working under (or alongside) completely different coaches at the time.
I don’t expect Nate to throw out everything he’s done for the past 5-10 years, but I do expect that Bernie and Bob will counsel McMillian differently than risk-averse Dean and Joe good n’ Prunty did. The experience factor alone on this year’s staff has probably tripled re: years coached in the NBA, and if Nate doesn’t take advantage of that wealth of knowledge, then he’ll deserve to be fired in April for failing to advance, again.
FWIW, I think he’s one healthy roster away from doing better than that.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
*that enabled
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Well I have been around long enough to say without any doubt
that all the statistics, the size and athleticism of the players, the increased comforts and incomes available to today’s athletes belie a deterioration in the quality of NBA ball. Last finals between LA and Boston was notable for sloppy play and tired legs. It also has been widely remarked for several years running by league know-alls that the basic skill level of entry players is alarmingly low. This is important because it represents an opportunity for a young, well coached team like the Trailblazers to advance deep into the playoffs. The so-called super teams are unproven but an athletic team with big centers and great passing can win championships. In my view we are one gifted guard from contention. Now we’re going to see how the chips fall.
This thread had some enlightening conversation
"Listening to the media only increases your odds of failing at whatever you are doing" - Mark Cuban
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Video: Boston works in a half-court football snap after winning the tip
- Judging the choices for the Eastern Conference All-Star team reserves
- Judging the choices for the Western Conference All-Star team reserves
- Jeremy Lin draws inspiration from Tim Tebow
- Stephen Jackson is already tired of Milwaukee
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
