Canzano weighs in on the point guard position

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
This column really troubles me. I've been thinking the exact same thing as Canzano about Sergio and Bayless. Since I know that Canzano is never right about anything, I'm going to have to rethink my entire position on the PG situation. ;)
 
e_blazer said:
This column really troubles me. I've been thinking the exact same thing as Canzano about Sergio and Bayless. Since I know that Canzano is never right about anything, I'm going to have to rethink my entire position on the PG situation. ;)
Click to expand...

Heh, I admit the same thought occurred to me.
 
They don't call him crapzano for nothing..... the article means nothing at this current point in blazer time.
 
a blind man could see this.

bayless and sergio? its not close. trade sergio asap...buy rudy a dog
 
At least Canzano admitted he made his decision 10 minutes after practice ended because he saw Bayless shooting 3's. So Bayless wants to succeed and Sergio doesn't want to work as hard on his game?

He must be a poster on this board to be able to make that quick of a judgement.

It doesn't matter to me. I'm sure Sergio will be a very good PG for somebody. Bayless reminds me of Stevie Franchise and can be very exciting but he needs the ball in his hands and so does Roy. I don't know how that will work out.
 
The NBA trade deadline is Feb. 19. The trade value of both players is at its highest. It's become clear that the Blazers cannot play both players, and so the front office needs to make a decision...
Click to expand...
Wow. Bayless is so progressed after 2 games of regular minutes that we only need one point guard on the roster (until Blake is back)? Good thing Roy and Rudy aren't at all banged up. Three more weeks of decision making time can't hurt. I'd just like to see Bayless with the starters and Sergio with Rudy/Pryz, where his poor perimeter D can be covered by a more experienced interior defender...

We know the guy has potential. He's proven it since starter Steve Blake went down with a shoulder injury. But what we couldn't be sure of is how willing Bayless is to work hard to improve his game...
Click to expand...
That might be the single stupidest thing that's been said about any Blazer all year. When has Bayless' willingness to work every been in question?
 
roydezlaw said:
Bayless reminds me of Stevie Franchise and can be very exciting but he needs the ball in his hands and so does Roy. I don't know how that will work out.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, Sergio needs the ball in his hands even more so than Bayless to be effective... Sergio is a worse scorer and much worse defender. Unless he's setting people up, what does he offer?
 
handiman said:
On the other hand, Sergio needs the ball in his hands even more so than Bayless to be effective... Sergio is a worse scorer and much worse defender. Unless he's setting people up, what does he offer?
Click to expand...

That's the whole point of a PG...to set your teammates up. Otherwise you're Stevie Franchise.
 
Last edited:
e_blazer said:
This column really troubles me. I've been thinking the exact same thing as Canzano about Sergio and Bayless. Since I know that Canzano is never right about anything, I'm going to have to rethink my entire position on the PG situation. ;)
Click to expand...

LOL, too funny.

Canzano is an idiot. He is just learning about Bayless' desire to improve? Where the hell has he been? That was one of Jared's strengths going into the draft. And trying to get rid of Sergio before the trade deadline without a healthy Blake would probably send this team into a tailspin. Blake's injury opened the door for Bayless but it may have closed the window on a trade at the PG spot.
 
I am just wondering why so many folks think we have to choose between Sergio and Bayless. I personally think Blake is the odd man out. His contract isn't long term. His upside is negligible.
 
hasoos said:
I am just wondering why so many folks think we have to choose between Sergio and Bayless. I personally think Blake is the odd man out. His contract isn't long term. His upside is negligible.
Click to expand...


sergio will never be anything close to the long-range threat blake is. that matters a lot more than his "upside" in other respects.
 
hasoos said:
I am just wondering why so many folks think we have to choose between Sergio and Bayless. I personally think Blake is the odd man out. His contract isn't long term. His upside is negligible.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The obvious guard pairings are Bayless-Roy starting, Sergio-Rudy off the bench. Once Nate finally makes that switch permanent, then I think we'll be good to grow.
 
crowTrobot said:
sergio will never be anything close to the long-range threat blake is. that matters a lot more than his "upside" in other respects.
Click to expand...

I think the point then that you are missing, is the team doesn't want to be shooting so many 3 pointers. That is exactly why Sergio and Bayless are better for the team. Right now the team often ends up in the "live by the 3, die by the 3" mode. Games are won in the paint, with high percentage shots and putting your team in the best position to get rebounds for extra posessions. You do not get that by jacking up 3's like there is no tomorrow.
 
hasoos said:
I think the point then that you are missing, is the team doesn't want to be shooting so many 3 pointers. That is exactly why Sergio and Bayless are better for the team. Right now the team often ends up in the "live by the 3, die by the 3" mode. Games are won in the paint, with high percentage shots and putting your team in the best position to get rebounds for extra posessions. You do not get that by jacking up 3's like there is no tomorrow.
Click to expand...


It'll be interesting to see how Orlando does in the playoffs this year with a dominant center and a bunch of 3 pt. shooters. I'll be rooting for them to come out of the east. I think with the pressure the playoffs brings, those shooters will tighten up a bit and I'll be disappointed. I'd much rather they win than Boston or Cleveland.
 
roydezlaw said:
It'll be interesting to see how Orlando does in the playoffs this year with a dominant center and a bunch of 3 pt. shooters. I'll be rooting for them to come out of the east. I think with the pressure the playoffs brings, those shooters will tighten up a bit and I'll be disappointed. I'd much rather they win than Boston or Cleveland.
Click to expand...

Didn't Orlando try this before, when one of the three point shooters was called Dennis Scott? Only then they not only had a better big man, they had a first-team all-NBA'er at guard.

And if the Blazers can be one banked three-pointer away from sweeping them, I'm not sure I'm ready to pencil them in for a championship.

Re: Blake's three point shooting: his three pointers come most often when he's spotting up and Brandon is handling the ball. In other words, when Blake is playing SG. I'd rather have Rudy do that.
 
hasoos said:
I think the point then that you are missing, is the team doesn't want to be shooting so many 3 pointers. That is exactly why Sergio and Bayless are better for the team. Right now the team often ends up in the "live by the 3, die by the 3" mode. Games are won in the paint, with high percentage shots and putting your team in the best position to get rebounds for extra posessions. You do not get that by jacking up 3's like there is no tomorrow.
Click to expand...


i'm not missing anything. whether we shoot too many 3's with blake on the floor or not is a coaching issue. the point is the threat of outside shooting keeps defenses honest and allows our offense to be more versatile.
 
roydezlaw said:
It'll be interesting to see how Orlando does in the playoffs this year with a dominant center and a bunch of 3 pt. shooters. I'll be rooting for them to come out of the east. I think with the pressure the playoffs brings, those shooters will tighten up a bit and I'll be disappointed. I'd much rather they win than Boston or Cleveland.
Click to expand...

Yea if you remember a little bit of history, the first Shaq team that went to the finals was built the exact same way. They lost to Houston, because Houston made Nick Anderson the main scorer on the team, and all he could do is shoot 3's and miss free throws. The team that was dominant in the paint, Houston, won the series. But that is history, and these are different times. Maybe it will work out different this time. I doubt it, but there is always a first.
 
hasoos said:
Yea if you remember a little bit of history, the first Shaq team that went to the finals was built the exact same way. They lost to Houston, because Houston made Nick Anderson the main scorer on the team, and all he could do is shoot 3's and miss free throws. The team that was dominant in the paint, Houston, won the series. But that is history, and these are different times. Maybe it will work out different this time. I doubt it, but there is always a first.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I agree with your recollection of history... Houston was a very similarly assembled team, with a bunch of 3-pt shooters spread out around Hakeem. How it played out is a matter of individual talent and teammwork, not necessarily differences in style of play.
 
handiman said:
I'm not sure I agree with your recollection of history... Houston was a very similarly assembled team, with a bunch of 3-pt shooters spread out around Hakeem. How it played out is a matter of individual talent and teammwork, not necessarily differences in style of play.
Click to expand...

Hakeem was a much better defender than Shaq. Series.
 
hasoos said:
Yea if you remember a little bit of history, the first Shaq team that went to the finals was built the exact same way. They lost to Houston, because Houston made Nick Anderson the main scorer on the team, and all he could do is shoot 3's and miss free throws. The team that was dominant in the paint, Houston, won the series. But that is history, and these are different times. Maybe it will work out different this time. I doubt it, but there is always a first.
Click to expand...

Yeah I remember and I still dislike Nick Anderson. I used to root for Shaq before he went to LA. This years Orlando team is one I watch as much as possible. Last year I enjoyed watching Turkoglu and this year Jameer Nelson is playing great and usually the best point guard on the floor.
 
handiman said:
I'm not sure I agree with your recollection of history... Houston was a very similarly assembled team, with a bunch of 3-pt shooters spread out around Hakeem. How it played out is a matter of individual talent and teammwork, not necessarily differences in style of play.
Click to expand...

Yes they had 3 point shooters. But Houston was inside out. Orlando was outside in. That is why they lost. It's not necessarily about who was playing what position, but how they played. Clyde Drexler dominated Hardaway, and he didn't do it from the outside. Hakeem dominated Shaq, and he didn't do it from the outside. The shots Houston took from the outside were shots within the flow of their offense. The shots Orlando took were because certain players on the perimeter were mistakenly under the impression they were more important to the team than Shaq.

The facts are missed 3 pointers lead to long rebounds and transition points for the opposition.

The facts are that 3 pointers are a much lower percentage shot than going inside.

The facts are that your bigs are usually out of position to rebound when early 3's are taken.

The facts are that by shooting 3's you never get your opponents bigs into foul trouble, because they never have to make the effort to stop pentration.

So believe as you will. I firmly believe being an outside in team is bad, and I believe Portland has been way too much of an outside in team when they could easily be the other way around.
 
roydezlaw said:
At least Canzano admitted he made his decision 10 minutes after practice ended because he saw Bayless shooting 3's. So Bayless wants to succeed and Sergio doesn't want to work as hard on his game?
Click to expand...

I found that quote from Canzano a bit odd: "The question all along with Bayless centers on his desire to improve"

Really? Has that been the question all along? I was always under the impression that his work ethic and desire to get better was a given. The only question I ever have about Bayless is can he run a team when Roy is not out there? I have never questioned his desire. Pg vs SG is a question. Shooting is a question. Work ethic? Never.

I know Canzano talks like he knows his shit......but like most columnists they are hired because they can "write", not because they are ever "right".
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I found that quote from Canzano a bit odd: "The question all along with Bayless centers on his desire to improve"

Really? Has that been the question all along? I was always under the impression that his work ethic and desire to get better was a given. The only question I ever have about Bayless is can he run a team when Roy is not out there? I have never questioned his desire. Pg vs SG is a question. Shooting is a question. Work ethic? Never.

I know Canzano talks like he knows his shit......but like most columnists they are hired because they can "write", not because they are ever "right".
Click to expand...

bingo, thats the real question and i don't think jbay has answered that yet.

personally i think this is the biggest vote for sergio ever, i mean if crapzano is backing bayless/blake that means great thinks for serg right?
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I found that quote from Canzano a bit odd: "The question all along with Bayless centers on his desire to improve"

Really? Has that been the question all along? I was always under the impression that his work ethic and desire to get better was a given. The only question I ever have about Bayless is can he run a team when Roy is not out there? I have never questioned his desire. Pg vs SG is a question. Shooting is a question. Work ethic? Never.

I know Canzano talks like he knows his shit......but like most columnists they are hired because they can "write", not because they are ever "right".
Click to expand...


I agree with all of it.
 
bigbailes said:
bingo, thats the real question and i don't think jbay has answered that yet.

personally i think this is the biggest vote for sergio ever, i mean if crapzano is backing bayless/blake that means great thinks for serg right?
Click to expand...

Well you know what they say about a stopped clock being right twice a day.

Frankly I think Canzano's premise and observations are shaky, but I do think the overall conclusion that Bayless is the long term answer is probably close. I got the distinct impression on courtside last night (from Confucius-Rice) that the entire coaching staff is pretty high on the kid, and the way Barret and Wheels agreed with him I'm not sure there is a lot of debate.

However I don't think it's so much about Bayless vs. Sergio as I think it's more about Blake vs. Sergio -- and depending on how the next couple of weeks to a month go for Chacho with extended minutes we may get our answer. Frankly I'm hoping both Sergio and Bayless have a really good run, because It sure would be nice to have that extra cap room this summer to sign a really high quality FA small forward and backup power forward versus having to carry Blake's (albeit reasonable) 4 million dollar deal.
 
hasoos said:
I am just wondering why so many folks think we have to choose between Sergio and Bayless. I personally think Blake is the odd man out. His contract isn't long term. His upside is negligible.
Click to expand...

Blake doesn't pass the ball as well as Sergio but is a much better scorer. I've always pictured Blake as the perfect backup PG - not overly flashy, solid fundamentals, not going to kill you with mistakes and will occasionally be a game changer.

I also agree with others that Sergio would thrive in a more run-and-gun environment as he seems to have a more opportunist view on passing and sees those opportunities better than many.

Thus, I stand in the Sergio or Bayless camp with Blake being the additional PG.

Gramps...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top