Dante Cunningham back to being a 5.
Just like he did in college at Villanova, Cunningham is playing center again. Yep, he's Marc Gasol's backup in Memphis.
The Grizzlies even think well enough of Cunningham at the backup 5 to have waived a fellow former Blazer, Brian Skinner, who's older than dirt.
Anyhow, I never understood why many folks thought he should be a 3. Cunningham's natural position is the 4, while he went through college playing the 5. Never, however, did he show an ability to effectively play the 3, particularly on offense.
I'm now starting to see this with people commenting on Nicolas Batum, who is not, was not, nor ever will be capable of competently playing the 2. Like with Cunningham and the 3, Batum's offensive skill set doesn't fit the positional requirements needed to play the 2.
5 months ago
AK1984
87 comments
1 recs |
Email
PrintComments
It’s not like Wesley is particularly suited to play the 2 offensively. Maybe he dribble drives and draws fouls slightly more than Nic, but I don’t think that makes him good at it. Wesley is pretty much a 3 offensively.
Still, playing Nic at the 2 will probably work less well than playing him at the 4 for stretches which is funny to figure. Nice for Dante to find a good gig like that.
Yeah, Wesley Matthews optimal position is the 3. Yet, despite his flaws, he's at least passable at the 2.
And that’s another thing about Nicolas Batum. Not only is the 2 far from being his primary position, it’s also not his secondary position. As you said, he’s more suited to play the 4 than the 2 in short spurts. If I were to classify them, I’d label Cunningham a 4/5, Batum a 3/4, and Matthews a 3/2.
"I Am Mine"
by AK1984 on Dec 31, 2011 5:48 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree AK
Some nights, Nic can cover other positions. But it also requires matchups where what we exploit with Nic doesn’t get exploited. On nights where Nic is at the 2, we also need someone to handle the ball pretty exclusively. If we put Nic on a point guard, we need the other teams 2 to be someone who doesn’t exploit Felton. Nic can play 4 occasionally. However, if that works it works even better with GW at the 4. More often than not, Nic playing guard really depends upon other matchups as well.
Trust and look for each other
by Hermistonmelons on Dec 31, 2011 8:25 AM PST up reply actions
"classify them" ?
how about , let them play basketball , and let Nate worry about the lineup. I don’t cookie cut players, since I think it can be different against different teams lineups. I worry less about media writing , and more about an injury free Camby the rest of the season.
Regardless of who plays Dante where, I wish he were still a Blazer, and like him 100 % more than the Rhino to back up LA.
Nico and Dante, neither one have been in the league long enough to have reached their ceilings yet, imo.
just win baby !
I like Smith better
Dante has no low post game Rhino does. I think another big who can score in the post is far more important to the Blazers than Dante’s decent mid range jumper. Kurt Thomas is better defender and has a better jumper than Dante.
Red means run, son, numbers add up to nothin
"Kurt Thomas is better defender and has a better jumper than Dante."
That goes without question. Kurt Thomas is, without a doubt, the goddamn man.
"I Am Mine"
by AK1984 on Dec 31, 2011 7:00 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
KT or the Rhino, wont be around forever,
lets revisit this conversation at the end of Dantes career for a fair comparison.
The Grizz also signed Haddidi, lets see where Dante plays the rest of the season.
Get back to me guys.
just win baby !
To clarify,
I also didnt say Dante to Thomas. I said to the Rhino, when we revisit this.
<3 KT, but he’s 39.
Let’s talk about Nico and Dante after they have been in the league as long as Thomas.
Then worry about how the Blazer bigs in uniform now play against DeAndre Jordan and and Howdy tonight.
Go Blazers !!
just win baby !
I mentioned KT
because he fills a very similar role to Dante with the Blazers. Rhino provides a different role. Dante will probably be a solid role player for the next 8 years. Of course solid role player is another name for just another guy.
Red means run, son, numbers add up to nothin
Great game in OKC tonight !
But, I’m still not impressed with the Rhino. The Blazers need a strong bench.
Nico had a great game. Quit trying to label him, or make starting a compition with GW. It’s a team sport.
You will never convince me the Blazers wouldnt be better with Nico and Dante coming off the bench. Solid role players win championships.
Imo, KT is here to back up Camby for the most part. Not LA, the Rhino backs up LA. Again, we will see where Dante plays in Memphis. My $ is on behind ZBO, and Haddidi behind little Gasol. Compare Dante to the Rhino and what do you get ?
Dante is a diamond in the rough. Tough,smart kid, always in the right spot, boxes out, and never hurts you on offense.
Use them both for what works to win, when has blogging won a game ?
just win baby !
Rhino is solid
his per 36 numbers for his career are 16 points 8 reb and 5 fouls and 55% fg. He’s a good post scorer below avg rebounder and avg defender (he knows how to make his fouls count).
Dante is a solid defender with a decent jump shot. KT is a solid defender with a good jump shot.
Rhino brings something to the table that Dante and KT do not.
Red means run, son, numbers add up to nothin
eh, I think Nic sucks at the 4 too.
I dislike smallball, but I don’t hate going smallball with GW at the 4. I hate hate hate it when Nate goes smallball with Nic at the 4—he just sucks defensively and doesn’t rebound enough to defend that position, unlike GW. I’d never play Nic at anything other than the 3.
And yeah, Cunningham is purely a small’ish 4, not a big 3, and because of his size, best suited to a bench role. Being able to occasionally hit jumpshots doesn’t make a PF a SF.
by howlingfantods on Dec 31, 2011 8:43 AM PST up reply actions
I didn't say Nicolas Batum is good at the 4, but rather that he can play it in a pinch. But yeah, it's ...
not his optimum position. Regardless, I’d still play Batum at the 4 before I’d play him at the 2. Due to Batum’s weak handles, absence of a dribble-drive game, and lack of court vision, using him at the 2 on offense is a no-go.
"I Am Mine"
by AK1984 on Dec 31, 2011 6:58 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Well, my Uncle John was passable when he became Aunt Juanita, but that didn't mean that I wanted him as MY Aunt Juanita
This is my signature. Do you like it?
Yeah, I agree with all of that.
But in practice I think positional determinants like this are somewhat based upon the personnel involved. Imagine if Nic was on a team like the Heat. I bet he could play in a rotation with DWade, Lebron, Bosh, and Haslem. In that lineup, he’d probably guard the 1 or the 2 of the opposing team and offensively he’d probably act like a spot up shooter much like I figure Battier will do with them. But how would one label the positions on teams like that when you have guys like Lebron and Wade as primary ball handlers?
by your face on Dec 31, 2011 6:00 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Yep
I can’t agree with AK because I don’t see players as set pieces that can only be used one way. I think you can effectively use a player at any position that they can guard. I don’t have a problem with nic playing the “2” if you don’t need ball handling from that player.
You could make the case that he played the 1 at times last year with Roy bringing the ball up the floor.
Btw, has anyone else been mildly impressed by Atlanta's performance this season
with a starting lineup that features 4 natural forwards and no point guard? They’ve played bad teams, sure, but they’ve blown them out with a very non-traditional lineup.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
Although Jeff Teague isn't a pure point guard, he's an adequate enough distributor to play the 1.
Also, Joe Johnson’s natural position on offense is the 2. A big 2, but still a 2. As it is, Johnson’s skill set is that of a poor man’s B-Roy. Well, back when Roy was healthy.
"I Am Mine"
You're missing my point
You see the world through such monochromatic glasses, my friend.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
it's REALLY easy to look good
when you play Washington and New Jersey (twice).
by howlingfantods on Dec 31, 2011 9:19 PM PST up reply actions
True, they've only done what they should be able to do, nothing more
But the point is that every one of their starters, and one of their key bench guys, completely defies traditional positional dogma. It is interesting that they have nevertheless been able to put together very respectable, albeit not unexpected, performances with quite the non-traditional lineup.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
teague is a 1, jj is a 2, marv is a 3, josh is a 4.
The only remotely non-traditional guy is Al, who’s a little undersized for a 5.
by howlingfantods on Jan 1, 2012 11:13 PM PST up reply actions
The only argument one could have is with Jeff Teague, who's a 1/2 combo guard.
Even then, Teague and Joe Johnson are still complementary fits together on offense.
"I Am Mine"
Interesting
You use Memphis as a basis of an argument only to say that they are both
correct?
The Grizzlies even think well enough of Cunningham at the backup 5
and incorrect?
Cunningham’s natural position is the 4
Then you try to relate this past mistake (?) in positional classification to Batum?? I don’t see how this relates at all. Batum is one player with a certain set of skills and Cunningham is a different player with a different set of skills.
Other factors might seem to lead to more rational system of player classification. For example: 1) What position does the player want to play and feel comfortable playing; 2) What offense are we talking about running and what are the skill sets of the players on the court at the same time; and 3) What are the skill sets of the opponents and the game plans of the teams involved?
I am not trying to be smart here, but you didn’t make any real arguments to back up rather negative assertions that Batum and Cunningham would probably think of as ‘excessively limiting classifications.’ I’ll bet Batum thinks he can play the 2! He probably wants more time there now because of Wallace’s presence. Maybe not perfect, but not so far out of line either.
I believe he can do it; he just might be better at it than some might think. At least that is my opinion anyway :).
by BillWalton'sGhost on Dec 31, 2011 8:48 AM PST reply actions 10 recs
we're talking skillsets here.
Batum doesn’t have the ballhandling skills you want for your 2 guard and struggles to guard quicker/smaller 2s; he also doesn’t rebound well enough to be a passable smallball 4 and can’t defend 4s. He’s a pure 3 man, without the strength and hustle that makes someone like Gerald Wallace a workable smallball 4.
Dante doesn’t have perimeter skills that you need to be a wing, particularly on defense. He can only guard interior type defenders, but because of his size can’t really guard starting 4s. But teams often carry undersized 4s and 5s on their benches, and Dante can hold his own against other undersized bigs off the bench. So he’s best suited to be a bench 4. Memphis is making him a bench 5 basically out of desperation—they’re ridiculously thin in reserve bigs.
The point AK’s making is that it’s fun to root for non-positionality, but the reality is that most players can only fill one position well, and it’s the very rare player that can play multiple positions at the all-world level needed to compete in a league as tough as the NBA.
by howlingfantods on Dec 31, 2011 12:47 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
The idea that Batum doesn't have the ball-handling skills to handle the 2 is a myth
He handles the ball better than Mathews, by a wide margin – among many other players that are widely and unconditionally accepted as “2 guards” (it’s a big list)…
If you don’t like 82games.com’s “Hands Rating” as evidence, then TOV% and AST% should be evidence enough that Batum has the “handles” necessary to play shooting guard.
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 31, 2011 3:02 PM PST up reply actions
Batum's dribble is constantly above his waist.
He fails the eyeball test.
by Oden Mad, Oden Smash! on Dec 31, 2011 4:57 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
You can't name an NBA player, regardless of position, that doesn't dribble with the ball above his waist
If you are trying to say that Batum doesn’t dribble low when under one on one defensive pressure – you would be incorrect…
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 31, 2011 5:24 PM PST up reply actions
Nicolas Batum's AST% sucks for a wing.
His TOV% would also skyrocket if his USG% increased domestically like it did overseas this year.
"I Am Mine"
Did his TOV% skyrocket when his USG% increased overseas?
He averaged 17 points, 6 rebounds, 4 assists, 2 steals, and 3 turnovers per game while playing shooting guard. overseas…
Not saying you are wrong, but it’s not like he actually failed at the position.
Matthews is currently averaging more turnovers per game than assists. I guess I don’t understand your point. If Batum isn’t a shooting guard then Matthews isn’t either… which in my mind makes them more or less interchangeable.
Are you saying Jamal Crawford is the only shooting guard on the team?
by Nick Van Excellent on Dec 31, 2011 10:44 PM PST up reply actions
"Are you saying Jamal Crawford is the only shooting guard on the team?"
By natural position? Yes, he is.
By secondary position, I’d take Wesley Matthews over Nicolas Batum at the 2.
"I Am Mine"
Why?
What exactly does Mathews do that Batum not do just as well? What is funny about Mathews and Batum as that, last year, they were extremely similar by any metric – except ball handling and foul percentage.
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
I agree with the first part.
The second part is more tricky. I think maybe people (including myself) might underestimate Batum as a shooting guard because he doesn’t look like a shooting guard.
We’ve never seen him used in that role except in France, where he looked down-right fantastic. I agree that he’s not a natural 2, but besides size it’s never been explained how he’s any different than Matthews.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jan 1, 2012 1:39 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
How's this not rec'd green and BWG's comment is?
To me, that shows a depressing lack of basketball acumen around these parts. It’s sad, really.
Whatever, though. I’m not one to try and change people’s minds, since I believe that folks have the right to be wrong. An inalienable right to be wrong. Besides, the human existence would be an absolute bore if everyone was right all the time.
"I Am Mine"
You have a rebuttable position
but your typical response is to cry foul on the information or make acumen accusations…
one thing about statistics is that they are testable. Vitriolic adjectives are not.
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
To be honest, I can be an overemotional debater. There's no arguing that.
Somebody such as Jake or Atomic would do a more sound job than me in refuting your stance.
"I Am Mine"
It might help to know that I am not trying to argue that Batum is a good SG
Only that his weaknesses as a SG are shared by a lot of guys that play that position…
I also have the opinion that you underrate Batum in general – but within the context of this discussion, I am not trying to prove that point….
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
"Only that his weaknesses as a SG are shared by a lot of guys that play that position…"
By that same token, I think it’s weak that the Minnesota T’wolves play Wes Johnson out of position at the 2.
Looking at the T’wolves roster, it needs to swing a trade for somebody like, oh, O.J. Mayo.
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=6uj9qp5
Like Nicolas Batum, Johnson is very mistake prone when he puts the ball on the floor — which has to do with his weak handles — and, moreover, rarely creates opportunities for teammates on offense due his poor court vision.
Y’see, my argument from the get-go has to do with skill sets. Take Batum out of it, for we can find other wings on other teams who’ve got no business at all playing the 2 — but do so anyway — and my argument still stands.
"I Am Mine"
What's also sad is the lack of understanding that you have in the number of teams in the NBA
Would playing Batum at the 2 make him one of the best players in the NBA? No. But there are 30 teams in the NBA. That means 30 starting 2s. That also means 30 players come off the bench at some point to spell those positions. (sometimes they are combo players, so go ahead and call them 1/2s 2/3s 2/1s or whatever else you want.) Playing Batum at the 2 would drastically change Nate’s offense. Instead of Batum passing the ball into LMA on the right block and then curling through the paint to the weakside so Matthews could cut to the top of the key as an outlet, the Blazers would be forced to have Wallace passing the ball into LMA on the right block and then curling through the paint to the weakside so Batum could cut to the top of the key as an outlet.
You triumphantly declare that Batum is not a SG and Wesley is not a SG. and blah blah blah so and so can’t play this position in the NBA. Yet people can point out that positions are fluid, real life is not Stratomatic. Wesley is not the best SG at dribble penetration, Batum struggles at pressure on the dribble, JEFF TEAGUE is not really a classic PG, and JOE JOHNSON HAS PLAYED LOTS OF SF IN HIS LIFE. DURANT’S ASSIST PERCENTAGE SUCKS FOR A WING AND FOR HIS USAGE, BUT GUESS WHAT, HE PLAYS ON. THE. WING.
Your debating position revolves solely around Coach Norman Dale’s playbook. The hoop’s ten feet off the ground. Play ball.
dinasour type of guys choir boys
I haven't seen more than just bits and pieces of Hoosiers. Just clips of it. Not my kind of film.
Anyway, while watching some of tonight’s game, what’s sad is seeing that Blake Griffin has got better handles than Nicoals Batum. That’s not to say Griffin is anything but a 4, but just that he’s got better handles than someone you and others laughably advocate can play the 2.
"I Am Mine"
Based on what?
Your keen eye and basketball acumen? What a joke. The reason why BWG’s posts get recs is that he/she can actually make a point and back it up with thoughtful reasons. You throw out baseless statements much like a child without a filter.
by TheLegendofBRoy on Jan 1, 2012 10:50 PM PST up reply actions
Again, y'all've got the right to be wrong.
No one — not even I — can take that away from you.
"I Am Mine"
I don't want Batum at the 2.
I just think your positional analyses is simplistic and more suited to 6th graders in a church league.
dinasour type of guys choir boys
I don't think you were attempting to be overtly insulting or personal, but when you say
How’s this not rec’d green and BWG’s comment is? To me, that shows a depressing lack of basketball acumen around these parts. It’s sad, really.
You are making yet another assertion without proper foundational knowledge.
You certainly do not know my basketball background and even if you did, you have not outlined any logical connection from this supposedly inferior grooming up to my current condition of low basketball acumen.
Some people put their emphasis on the numbers. Some people put their emphasis on the eyeball test. Some will emphasize that both the numbers and the eyeballs must be considered in context (my position) because they both tell lies and darn lies.
The truth of the matter is that we are all guessing to some extent! But following the template that modern science has provided us, I tend to examine my theories based on their direct ability to predict future events (confirmation—within a given context—is the best ‘fact’ checking method as far as I am concerned). No method is perfect!
Basketball—or life for that matter— is not explainable in simplistic/summary terms. And, stereotyping (personal or generalized) rarely leads to an accurate depiction of where people are coming from. As for myself, I was fortunate to compete favorably against a number of professional athletes including NBA players. I feel like I gained certain insights by reaching that level, but unfortunately, that experience represents only one small piece of the pie when it comes to making basketball decisions or predicting the outcome of personnel moves.
by BillWalton'sGhost on Jan 1, 2012 11:17 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
"or life for that matter"
Life can be summed up in two words: It sucks.
The thing is different people experience different levels of suck. Some people’s lives suck just a little, while other people’s lives suck a lot. It’s still some form of suck, though.
"I Am Mine"
My hyperbolic ranting about your "basketball acumen" and disdain for life in general aside, ...
the argument is that wings with weak handles and substandard court vision shouldn’t play the 2.
That said, I apologize for my part in things getting off track and the derailing of this discussion.
All right, moving on …
If not Nicolas Batum, then we can have this debate about non-Blazers. That way, it’ll be easier for Blazer fanatics who are pro-Batum — which I presume you are — to be unbiased with regards to the topic at hand.
So, with that said, I pose to you this question: What’s Wes Johnson’s position in your eyes? How about DeMar DeRozan? Where’s Nick Young fit? What about Gerald Henderson?
I argue that they’re all natural 3s who are playing out of position at the 2. Yet, to be more specific, I’d classify Henderson as a 3/2 swingman — à la Wesley Matthews — while DeRozan, Johnson, and Young are pure 3s like Nicolas Batum.
"I Am Mine"
Sorry to be late with this reply
But, apology accepted even though it was not really needed. I never took what you said so personally. I respect your passion for the game and your desire to get at the truth of the matter.
Actually I should probably apologize for not having the time to make a better counter argument myself :).
by BillWalton'sGhost on Jan 5, 2012 4:56 AM PST up reply actions
I always felt Dante made good decisions on the court
He took shots that were within the flow of the game and his abilities. And, he didn’t pass on good ones. I felt he did what a good reserve does. They pretty much hold their own while the starters rest.
A lot of where a player fits is dependent on the whole team, others skillsets and matchups with other teams.
Trust and look for each other
by Hermistonmelons on Dec 31, 2011 9:49 AM PST reply actions
This is all based on offense.
Defensively, I think Cunningham matches up best with SFs, and Batum is best on SGs.
Cunningham will get rocked by big PFs and Cs. He can play big, but at the end of the day he’ll get taken to task by scoring bigs every day of the week. Put him on a SF however, and he’s a wet blanket. Same with Nico. Face him up with an average PF and they’ll walk all over him. Even larger SFs can be trouble. SGs are helpless against his length and intelligence.
So yeah, in one demension you’re totally right. Dante can’t shoot the 3pter, so he’s no SF. Batum isn’t a great ball handler, so he’s no SG. Extend that to the defensive end and pigeon holing players gets a little trickier.
Doers & Makers > Movers & Shakers
by Adam Randall on Dec 31, 2011 12:48 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
"Defensively, I think Cunningham matches up best with SFs, and Batum is best on SGs."
Dante Cunningham lacks the foot speed and lateral quickness needed to guard most opposing 3s.
With Nicolas Batum, my main concern for him defensively isn’t positional — although he’s more suited to defend the 3 than the 2 — but rather effort based. Batum floats way too often and, as a result, gets burned on occasion. I doubt that’ll ever change, either.
"I Am Mine"
It's not even necessarily physical limitations like lateral quickness.
His instincts are all wrong. He’s been a big his entire life, he has no idea how to properly defend wings.
Good defensive bigs know how to do things like help off their guys to protect the bucket, when to do that by trying to go for a block versus set up for a charge, how and when to reach to knock away entry passes into the post, techniques for boxing out for defensive boards. Good defensive wings know things like the right amount of space to concede to the guy they’re defending, how to help and recover, how to handle a guy facing you in the three point stance, when to go over or under a screen. Just totally different skillsets, and DC only has the one. It’s very very rare to find a guy who can defend both bigs and wings effectively.
by howlingfantods on Dec 31, 2011 9:11 PM PST up reply actions
You are getting pedantic on Batum
It would help if you didn’t ignore facts while trying to push that position….If Batum can’t play the 2, then Mathews can’t play the 2 and about 50 other 2-guards can’t play the 2.
Your criteria are arbitrary – and incorrect. There isn’t a single stat you can point to that says Batum can’t play the 2 – especially relative to the vast majority of 2’s in the game.
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 31, 2011 1:25 PM PST reply actions 6 recs
and let me apologize in advance
stats aren’t facts, but they are useful information….
Also, Holt was fired…
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 31, 2011 1:32 PM PST up reply actions
Look at it this way.
If Batum dribbles the ball up the court and gets trapped against the half court line he simply doesn’t have a good enough handle to get out of that situation. Matthews is also not a shooting guard as are a lot of guys who play that position in the NBA.
The Blazers would greatly benefit from flipping Matthews and Batum for a shooting guard who can handle the ball.
by Oden Mad, Oden Smash! on Dec 31, 2011 5:06 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Dribbling out of a double team is bad basketball
But that aside, Batum does not turn the ball over.
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 31, 2011 5:17 PM PST up reply actions
You shouldn't make such brash assertions when the last game provides a brilliant counterexample to your claim.
by Oden Mad, Oden Smash! on Dec 31, 2011 7:34 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Citing small sample sizes will get you nowhere...
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
"Also, Holt was fired…"
On this New Year’s Day, we can all agree that’s a good thing.
Here’s to Rocky Seto as the next defensive coordinator of the Washington Huskies.
"I Am Mine"
Undisputable positive to start the New Year
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
The way you absue advance stats is getting disgusting, but I've held back on that so far.
"I Am Mine"
Everyone abuses stats.
Don’t make me dig through your comments. I have a good memory. (kidding)
by Nick Van Excellent on Dec 31, 2011 10:47 PM PST up reply actions
Feel free to use any stat, advanced, irrelevant or otherwise
…that would be more substantial than a rant with no support…
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
Your condescension has been disgusting for a long time, but I've held back because you're often right.
Doers & Makers > Movers & Shakers
by Adam Randall on Jan 1, 2012 10:29 AM PST up reply actions
I'm not always right, though, so it's fair to call me out.
Sometimes my optimism is even unwarranted. For example, I was higher on Greg Oden than Kevin Durant back in 2007, as well as wanted the big guy to drop to Seattle. Another example of misplaced optimism was Shelden Williams, who I thought would be a defensive stud at the NBA level.
I also sell players short occasionally. Last season, LaMarcus Aldridge’s jump in production caught me by surprise. To be honest, a part of me still thinks that might’ve been an aberration and he won’t be able to maintain it — which is why I don’t necessarily think he’ll be an All-Star this year — still, I’m less down on him now than before. LMA proved me wrong to some degree, yes. For that, I’ll give him credit.
Regarding Nicolas Batum, the jury’s still out — although the fact that a verdict hasn’t been rendered yet doesn’t look good for him — thus, it’s fair to hold off on his final judgement. For me, all I can talk about is what I’ve seen from him so far and what’s reasonable to expect going forward.
All I ask is that others also cop to their errors in judgement, with mittsabishy’s misplaced hatred of DeJuan Blair being an example. I also recall that Nick Van Excellent was once very high on Anthony Randolph, who’s yet to pan out.
Nobody’s perfect, especially me. And yes, I can certainly be a condescending prick from time to time. It’s nothing personal, of course. Plus, I have enough condescension built up inside of me to spread around evenly and, moreover, am fine if a few of y’all decided to send some my way, too. Fair is fair.
"I Am Mine"
by AK1984 on Jan 2, 2012 5:31 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
If anything, I've always considered you to be fair and honest.
Kinda mean, but certainly fair and honest.
I agree that copping to mistakes is vital. Storyteller had a FanPost awhile ago devoted to admitting mistakes, and I forget if I contributed, but over the years I’ve tagged both Bayless and Armon as PGOTFs, and I wrote that Dante’s ceiling was somewhere around Lamar Odom. Heck, at one point I wanted to trade LMA for Bosh! One thing I’ve never done is compare Batum to Pippen or Prince or anybody else. I maintain that he’s capable of giving 18 and 8 every night, but that’s as much as I’ll predict.
I understand that your attitude is not personal, and I’m glad you’re a part of this website because of the strength of your conviction and the breadth of your knowledge. All the same, this probably isn’t the last comment of yours that will draw criticism. I think you can handle it.
Doers & Makers > Movers & Shakers
by Adam Randall on Jan 2, 2012 12:12 PM PST up reply actions
"Heck, at one point I wanted to trade LMA for Bosh!"
Crazily enough, I still think Chris Bosh gets a bad rap.
In Miami, Bosh can only do so much as the 3rd option.
As a 2nd option, I’d take Bosh over LaMarcus Aldridge.
Anyhow, Nicolas Batum leads to varying predictions statistically. I’ve still got him at 14 and 5 myself. So far this season, it appears that I was high on the 14 and low on the 5. I stand by it, though.
With Armon Johnson, I was semi-high on him. My thought was that he’d make a serviceable backup guard like Antonio Daniels. Maybe he’s still got that in him, but it won’t be in Portland.
“I think you can handle it.”
That I can. There’s no doubt about it, either.
"I Am Mine"
Per 36, he's at about 17 and 9, not far off from Adam's guess.
it appears that I was high on the 14 and low on the 5
I don’t mean to sound nitpicky or homerish, but I think if he wasn’t playing behind Crawford, Wallace, and Matthews, he’d easily average 35-37 minutes per game. Ergo, using per 36 numbers seems more fair, to me at least.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
Yeah, for what its worth, I like your posts and overall attitude.
I have no problem with someone being brisk. You own it, so its beautiful. Shine on.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Jan 3, 2012 2:45 PM PST up reply actions
You have a skill in ascertaining what is...
I perceive you are limited in following potentials to their conclusions to come up with scenarios that extrapolate from evolving data. You can analyze the data within various internal matrices (biases) and reach valuable conclusions, but you have trouble extending those conclusions to include growth and evolution (which happen whether you want them to or not).
The “wrong” you keep pointing out in other people, is their ability to overcome said matrices and follow trends beyond the current accepted reality of player potential. You are criticizing the ability to adapt because the resulting predictions don’t fit with the data you’ve synthesized and the results you’ve accepted as true.
It doesn’t mean you’re wrong, I’m just saying there comes a time when we all need to upgrade our software and processer. ;)
I think Batum would make an excellent point guard.
Along with Magic at the 5
There are three positional issues that are being conflated:
1) Can a player fulfill the role traditionally ascribed to that position? For instance, does Batum have the “ball handling skills of a 2” or the "rebounding ability of a four.
2) Can the player be put into a lineup where they are ascribed that position based on size, where the size goes, roughly, 1-2-3-4-5 from smallest to biggest. For instance, can Batum play in a Crawford-Batum-Wallace-Aldridge-Camby lineup? What about a Felton-Crawford-Matthews-Batum-Aldridge lineup?
3) Can the player guard opponents in that position?
The key to the OP’s argument is the thesis this: Any viable lineup must have one person designated at each of the five positions, and the player at each position must possess the traditional skills associated with that position. Without this, there is no logical link between 1 and 2. Does it matter if Batum “isn’t a 2” if lineups that are really 1-3-3-4-5 or 1-2-3-3-5 are considered rational?
However, this thesis doesn’t hold any water to me. The way I see it, a lineup needs to satisfy certain needs:
a) Someone or someones who can handle the ball well enough to get the ball up the court, initiate the offense.
b) Be able to guard the other lineup.
c) Have enough outside shooting to space the floor.
d) have enough rebounding
e) have enough offensive threats.
Only a,b,d are really positional requirements, but I think lineups playing two traditional 3s instead of a 2 or 4 will often be able to meet all the requirements.
As a side note, I think that, in general, the necessity of having a 2 out is minimal, and many teams fill this position with natural 1s or 3s. (see Denver, Clippers, Dallas)
by jnewhouse on Dec 31, 2011 10:08 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
To touch on your last paragraph, I'd argue that it's easier to fill the 2 with a displaced 1 than a 3.
Dallas, Denver, and the Clippers are all examples of that. Looking at those teams, Jason Kidd, Andre Miller, and Chauncey Billups are all more well-equipped to defend the 2 than the 1 at this stage in their careers.
"I Am Mine"
I disagree that Batum can't play 2
He played a lot of 2 in France in the offseason, and he handled the ball well, ran pick and rolls, got Euroleague weekly MVP twice, averaged 17 pts 6 rebs and 5 assists per game with 46%fg and 38%3pt, he can run the fast break, he can guard the other teams shooting guard, he can post up opposing teams shooting guards with his size advantage and improved post game like he showed against Jimmer. Essentially I think he is a matchup nightmare on offense at shooting guard, with above average rebounding, blocked shots, and overall defense for the position. I don’t see why there would be any issue playing him at shooting guard.
by RUDYYYY on Dec 31, 2011 11:10 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
All I’d say is that people citing Nicolas’ line from the French league this season should also look at his Euroleague play. Both are such small samples as to be irrelevant but if you are gonna cite a 1.38 assist per turnover ratio as evidence he can play the 2, surely a 1.1 ratio with Nic committing almost 5 TOs per game in Euroleague would count against him to the same degree.
My position on Nic has always been that he’s a pure 3. I’ve seen nothing in any of the advanced stats to suggest he’s better being used at another position in even a limited capacity, let alone for the majority of his minutes.
| 23.1 | .647 | .605 | 15.6 | 28.3 | 21.9 | 6.7 | 0.9 | 7.7 | 17.8 | 20.7 | 118 | 100 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 2.2 | .214 |
by MadBlaze on Jan 1, 2012 1:34 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Here's a new question for you guys:
Would y’all rather have an oversized 1 or combo guard at the 2 (e.g., Chauncey Billups, Jason Kidd, Monta Ellis, Dwyane Wade, et al.) or a wing who’s a below average facilitator at the 2 (e.g., DeMar DeRozan, Landry Fields, Paul George, Nick Young, Wes Johnson, et al.)?
"I Am Mine"
You play with the hand you're dealt.
Right now, the Blazers don’t have a starting caliber SG (besides Crawford, who should stay the 6th man), so they’re in the position of needing to select the next best thing, which in my opinion is Batum—not because he’s a vastly superior player than Matthews, but because he fits better with the uptempo starters, specifically Wallace.
Since the Wallace trade, I’ve advocated for them starting together because of complimentary skillsets. Batum can guard PGs to stretch PFs, Wallace can guard SGs to PFs. Both are strong rebounders, and both are threats to steal the ball or block a shot. Offensively, they compliment each other best. Wallace loves to charge the hoop and Batum has a solid midrange jumper, meaning a PnR game could blossom between the two. But where they really click is running the break. When those two are out in the open court, it’s a beautiful thing to watch.
If the Blazers execute a trade bringing a starting quality SG, or even an oversized PG, then the argument stops. If one of the rookies suddenly fights his way into playing time, the argument stops. But until there is a clear-cut upgrade to Batum at that position, there are going to be people like myself who say, “Why not?”
Doers & Makers > Movers & Shakers
by Adam Randall on Jan 2, 2012 12:37 PM PST up reply actions
Although the idea of Batum at point is, was, and always will be laughable,
I don’t think Batum at the “2” falls into the “can’t” category. It’s not ideal, though. As I see it, a “2” guard gets the attack started. I think of Batum as more of a finisher, and the only guy on the team with solid catch-and-shoot capabilities. Batum’s D is also better suited for filling passing lanes with length and making sure nothing terribly embarrassing happens on the perimeter. He’s no “shut down” defender though. He’s just too laid back. Isn’t he better at the off guard position than a few starting 2s in the league, though? I would think so. I’ll take him over Foye, for instance.
I think we Blazer fans have a slightly distorted view of position, simply because we’ve had some duct taped together lineups out there in the last couple years. Currently, our backup “PG” is a guy whose idea of running the offense is beating his guy one-on-one and dishing to someone on the perimeter ala B Roy. Unfortunately, he can’t finish like B Roy, rebound like B Roy, or make the ball go into the basket with his Jedi-like mind control. I know how much you love Jamal Crawford, but he has his moments.
So maybe Nic at 2 isn’t ideal, but it could work in the right spots. I’d hope the roster gets properly balanced in the next couple seasons though. Winning teams have players with defined roles.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Jan 3, 2012 1:15 PM PST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Boston Celtics are moving on to the conference finals
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
