Martell: Dissapearing or lack of plays?

Give it another season, when they begin to realize there are more attractive alternatives out there, they'll turn.

I think next year you will see a whole different offensive orientation.  I think we play the A1, A2 game now out of necessity.

The "one on one" game and "swing the ball for the open jumper" game will give way to a more fluid offense, with more set plays (i think).  

I say this because the more movement we have in the offense next year, the more easy buckets Greg gets on drive-and-dumps and offensive rebounds. Seeing how he has handled LaMarcus this year, getting Greg easy points is going to be a focus of nate's offensive strategy.

Also, getting Greg into the offense with motion and designed plays will open up all of our traditional scoring methods (Brandon, Lamarcus jumpers, Jones 3s, etc.).  

So two more.

A) Does it remind you of how Indiana used Reggie  Miller?
or
B) Does it remind you of Danny Ainge playing with the Blazers?
or
C) Does it remind you of John Paxon, getting the left over scraps from Jordan, Pippen, and Kukoc?

I personally think answer C is what I'm going with.  Miller was the focal point and if the plays weren't being run for Rik Smits, Miller was getting the ball off of screens.

When Ainge played for Portland, he made a LIVING off of catching and shooting off of screens set on the perimeter.

Last night was a perfect example of how our offensive sets are lacking in number for Martell.  He just isn't getting the ball in position where he can do much with it.  The one time he was really open, he made Phoenix pay.

Our offense doesn't make a concerted effort to involve Martell, and it fails to take advantage of his athleticism.  The latter is my main concern and criticism of Nate regarding Martell.  For someone as athletic as Martell, why is he relegated strictly to spot up shooting?  Martell has shown he has a good intermediate shot from 15 ft.  Start him on the low block, have Joel or LMA screen for him, and give him the ball at the elbow.  If Martell got some back-up minutes at the 2, we could use Martell's 6'7 to post up some of the smaller guards, the same way we do with Roy. Martell has the ability to be a multi-dimensional player, and the nature of our offensive sets are causing him to be primarily a single dimensional player; spot up shooter.

All that being said, Martell should still be playing 3rd fiddle on offense.  He could help his cause a lot by improving his drives to the hoop.

   It is too bad. Trying to win the game Nate was probably justified in pulling Webster. However, Nate and/or an assistant coach should be communicating to Webster that they are NOT upset with him being aggresive, just upset at the specific mistake. He was trying to split a double team against some of the best.

   I'm not a Nate basher, but sometimes I think he needs to let Webster play through a mistake. It's bad enough when a young player looking for confidence makes a mistake on the court, but it can be compounded when it becomes underlined with an immediate demotion to the bench. I might of just let Webster stay in and give him the opportunity to react and improve his play. The chance for competitive redemption can build confidence.

He's 21 years old and averaging double figures, he would be a junior in college. If a rookie came in and averaged 10+ a game we would be ecstatic.

This year he's improved his consistency, become very proficient defensively, and has tentatively taken steps to learning to do more than spot up and shoot. He's had some pretty good rebounding games too.

Why does Martell struggle?

Most of this has to do with the fact that while he has the NBA body and athleticism he hasn't developed the skill sets he needs to be successful in the league. Keep in mind he used his superior size and strength to his advantage in high school, neglecting to learn and develop all the faucets of the game needed for the NBA.

It's like being the smartest kid in high school without studying and going to the Sorbonne expecting the same results with the same effort. Martell is taking baby steps to becoming a very good NBA player, I think he'll be better than Trout when all is said and done.

This is a little random, but do you notice that Trout literally has 2 moves? He is very effective at scoring with those 2 moves but still.

Example A is a bunch of crazy fakes and spins turning into a fade-away at the elbow, that would be a terrible shot for 95% of the NBA that goes in a peculiar amount of times.

Example B is the dribble, one step, straight up jumper.

The other shot Trout has is the top of the key open jumper, and rarely the corner three. Drives and dishes are pretty much nonexistent. Right now he's a pretty one dimensional scorer, probably the best one dimensional scorers in the NBA but whatever.  

Back on topic. Martell doesn't have any bread and butter moves like Trout has, and he's averaging 10ppg. Next year if he get's a few go to moves, learns how to dribble, he could be a 18ppg scorer on most teams.

Jermaine was the heir apparent to the PTB throne... had some witless GM not traded him for Dale Davis.

once again... Puh.....lease

Your 'gut feeling' doesn't count.

I guarantee they aren't paying $5 mil/year for the current version of Martell.

He isn't the first, second or even third option when he is in the game.  Maybe he would be better coming off the bench being the first or second option.  

Only positive about Martell is his age.  When you factor in the fact he has gotten solid minutes and ample opportunity to shine for 3 years without any discernible improvement in his game.  Red flags are everywhere.

His trade value is good exclusively due to his youth, I would trade him in the off season for a more proven consistent player if possible.