for how often people say Nate wouldn't like Nash...

[shamelessblazer]

I find these two quotes interesting:

http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2009/06/blazers_looking_for_some_grit.html

Blazers coach Nate McMillan agreed. When asked to identify some of the NBA's toughest players, his answers were unexpected. The first name mentioned? Steve Nash of the Phoenix Suns.

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/comments/nash-rambles-blazers-break-down-175279.html

And while there was certainly much to discuss regarding the veteran -- and plenty to dissect about woeful shooting and team hexes -- Trail Blazers coach Nate McMillan singled out another painful catalyst behind his team's 102-92 loss to the Phoenix Suns before 18,422 at US Airways Center:

Steve Nash.

"I think the guy is Nash," McMillan said. "He is still orchestrating that offense and getting everybody involved and (regarding) time, score and situation, he is probably as good as I've seen. That guy is a two-time MVP. Shaq did some good things; all those guys did some good things. But that show runs with Nash."

Let's get some toughness.

Batum could mask his defensive struggles, and our players would grow tremendously being around Steve Nash. Buy Low.

 

[Da_O]

 

[rocketeer]

Batum could mask his defensive struggles, and our players would grow tremendously being around Steve Nash. Buy Low.

how exactly would batum mask his defensive struggles?

nash would succeed in any system just because of how good of a shooter he is, but i don't see how one perimeter defender makes him any better defensively.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Nate also says he wants to push the ball every year, but we continue to have the one of slowest paces in the league.

In fact, our coach talks out of each ass cheek a lot.

 

[Wheels]

Nate also says he wants to push the ball every year, but we continue to have the one of slowest paces in the league.

In fact, our coach talks out of each ass cheek a lot.

or our PG's are incompetent at leading the break.

 

[Nikolokolus]

or our PG's are incompetent at leading the break.

Actually Sergio and Bayless are most comfortable running the break, and LaMarcus beats guards down the floor. We have two issues with running the break consistently. A) Brandon doesn't like to push tempo, and B) you can't run the break out of a made basket; if you really want high percentage fast break, up tempo basketball you have to get stops and despite how good we were on the glass last year we still allowed a very high FG%. If this team can generate more stops with their defense and then run out off of those perimeter stops then those are the kinds of fast break points I think Nate wants to see -- we'll never see the SSOL offense that D'Antoni runs.

 

[Wheels]

Actually Sergio and Bayless are most comfortable running the break, and LaMarcus beats guards down the floor. We have two issues with running the break consistently. A) Brandon doesn't like to push tempo, and B) you can't run the break out of a made basket; if you really want high percentage fast break, up tempo basketball you have to get stops and despite how good we were on the glass last year we still allowed a very high FG%. If this team can generate more stops with their defense and then run out off of those perimeter stops then those are the kinds of fast break points I think Nate wants to see -- we'll never see the SSOL offense that D'Antoni runs.

youre right on those points.. I should have worded it more carefully.. our only PG who even showed he remotely deserved to play last year (Blake in the regular season) is incompetent running the break.

 

[Mediocre Man]

youre right on those points.. I should have worded it more carefully.. our only PG who even showed he remotely deserved to play last year (Blake in the regular season) is incompetent running the break.

You should also check some stats out. When Blake went out with his injured shoulder the Blazers had the exact same winning % that they ended up with the entire year. While not as pollished, both Sergio and Bayless showed they deserved to play.

 

[hasoos]

You should also check some stats out. When Blake went out with his injured shoulder the Blazers had the exact same winning % that they ended up with the entire year. While not as pollished, both Sergio and Bayless showed they deserved to play.

That and they actually turned over the ball less than Blake. Which is another thing that so many pro Blake folks seem to deny reality about.

 

[andalusian]

You should also check some stats out. When Blake went out with his injured shoulder the Blazers had the exact same winning % that they ended up with the entire year. While not as pollished, both Sergio and Bayless showed they deserved to play.

You should also check the list of opponents:

@NjN, @CHA, MIL, CLE, WAS, CHA, UTH, @NOH*, @DAL, @OKC, NYK, OKC, @GSW

CLE, UTH, NOH and DAL are the only winning teams in this group, UTH sucks on the road and the win at NOH comes with a big fat * - since we were whipped until CP3 went down...

Sure, if we played mostly cupcakes or teams that suck on the road at the RG or NOH without CP3 - we would be OK with these guys manning the PG playing time - but let's face it - this is not exactly an elite test so the winning percentage here is highly doubtful.

I am a big believer in stats - as long as you put them in context...

This is a small sample size against mostly easy competition - does not seem like a good way to make these decisions...

 

[illmatic99]

I just have to SMH at people who make snide comments about BRoy's supposed inability to play uptempo. They clearly didn't watch him at UW.

 

[maxiep]

Nate also says he wants to push the ball every year, but we continue to have the one of slowest paces in the league.

In fact, our coach talks out of each ass cheek a lot.

Mo Cheeks to Ass Cheeks?

 

[Wheels]

That and they actually turned over the ball less than Blake. Which is another thing that so many pro Blake folks seem to deny reality about.

I'm far from a Blake supporter in all of this.. in fact I am more of a believer in Sergio as our backup, and Bayless as our future starter.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Well, cupcake as you put it or not, about 1/2 of those games were on the road where Portland was below .500.


Those cupcake teams that we played also had some nice wins.

NJ beat up on Atlanta all year, and beat Utah in Utah.

Milwaukee beat the Spurs twice, Miami, Boston and Dallas.

Washington beat Cleveland twice and won at Houston.

Charlotte beat Miami, Boston and the L*kers twice



I think it's fair to say that regardless of the so called cupcake factor, you still have to play hard and well to beat teams.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Mo Cheeks to Ass Cheeks?

Haha. I never thought of it that way.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I just have to SMH at people who make snide comments about BRoy's supposed inability to play uptempo. They clearly didn't watch him at UW.

If I recall correctly, and I am sure someone will point it out if I'm notrecalling it correctly, Roy has come out and said he prefers to play a more controlled pace.

 

[shamelessblazer]

or our PG's are incompetent at leading the break.

Ding Ding Ding

People talk all the time about how Brandon doesn't like to run the break (as a reason why we don't want a running PG), I say Bullshit. If your SG is terrible on the break it makes it twice as important that your PG can adequately run the break and get your SF, PF some easy buckets. Roy's a good rebounder, he should be crashing D-boards while Aldridge leaks out at least five or six times a game.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I just have to SMH at people who make snide comments about BRoy's supposed inability to play uptempo. They clearly didn't watch him at UW.

Who said can't? I said doesn't -- Roy likes to play in the half-court and likes to evalute a set defense as he brings the ball up the floor before he attacks it and he's one of the best players in the league at doing it. It's not a knock, it's just his style of play (so far) in the NBA

 

[Mediocre Man]

Ding Ding Ding

People talk all the time about how Brandon doesn't like to run the break (as a reason why we don't want a running PG), I say Bullshit. If your SG is terrible on the break it makes it twice as important that your PG can adequately run the break and get your SF, PF some easy buckets. Roy's a good rebounder, he should be crashing D-boards while Aldridge leaks out at least five or six times a game.

I should have added this to my above post about this, but even if Brandon doesn't like to run, he would be an ideal player to trail.

Last year on the team I coached we had two pretty slow kids. I am a coach that pushes the ball every possession, and we get a lot of easy baskets because of it. What I do is after a miss have my two slower kids trail and if a score off the break doesn't happen, I have my two slower players run a high pick and roll while the guys running the break curl out.

Portland could easily do the same thing with their roster. PG on a break with Aldridge and Batum, with Brandon and Oden trailing ready to run pick and roll with Aldridge popping and Batum and the PG curling.

 

[andalusian]

I think it's fair to say that regardless of the so called cupcake factor, you still have to play hard and well to beat teams.

Yes, but it still does not change the fact that basing your claims on our other PG's efficiency against these teams and calling it the law of the land is still very suspect, mathematically.

Just like assuming we are an awful team because we lost the first playoffs game by 30 would be very suspect, mathematically.

Given a larger sample size that encompass all the competition and includes a more representative performance against better teams - Blake was the only PG we had last year that looked like a real NBA PG. Not that he was great, not that he is the one I think is the best PG for the this team going forward into eternity - but based on the full year body of work - Sergio and Bayless were not great options at PG last year.

 

[hasoos]

I call bullshit on Brandon not wanting to run. He has good sense on when to pull it up and slow it down, but if you think Brandon doesn't like to run, then you need to think about a few years ago when the team literally didn't get even 1/3 of the fast breaks it does now, which is still bad. This is probably why the PG position causes me more lamentation than any other. Because one good PG, would make all the other guys, that much better on both ends of the court.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Yes, but it still does not change the fact that basing your claims on our other PG's efficiency against these teams and calling it the law of the land is still very suspect, mathematically.

Just like assuming we are an awful team because we lost the first playoffs game by 30 would be very suspect, mathematically.

Given a larger sample size that encompass all the competition and includes a more representative performance against better teams - Blake was the only PG we had last year that looked like a real NBA PG. Not that he was great, not that he is the one I think is the best PG for the this team going forward into eternity - but based on the full year body of work - Sergio and Bayless were not great options at PG last year.

Blake does not resemble a PG. He is an undersized SG. PG's penetrate, and draw people to them for easy baskets. Blake is a spot up shooter, and a good one. I view Sergio and, Bayless especially, as pinch hitters. It is SO much easier to play well when you know you are going to play. I think all three of their stats would be different if rolls were reversed.

 

[shamelessblazer]

Blake does not resemble a PG. He is an undersized SG. PG's penetrate, and draw people to them for easy baskets. Blake is a spot up shooter, and a good one. I view Sergio and, Bayless especially, as pinch hitters. It is SO much easier to play well when you know you are going to play. I think all three of their stats would be different if rolls were reversed.

Mediocre Man and I agree? What's the world coming to?

For all the people who say Brandon's not a PG (majority) it's amazing to me that they don't notice he's been playing one the last two years. And he's not, he doesn't have the court vision or ballhandling in the open court to be one. That's why bringing in a PG who could spread the floor (as blake does now) would help so much. I'd even take one who can't spread the floor much but is still a smart PG (Miller) it would make Brandon and our bigs' lives so much easier.

 

[andalusian]

Blake does not resemble a PG. He is an undersized SG. PG's penetrate, and draw people to them for easy baskets. Blake is a spot up shooter, and a good one. I view Sergio and, Bayless especially, as pinch hitters. It is SO much easier to play well when you know you are going to play. I think all three of their stats would be different if rolls were reversed.

The numbers just do not agree with you. Blake's AST% of 25% is very acceptable for a PG. Is he a great one? No. Can we upgrade over him? Sure. But given that he has a 25% AST% when playing next to a ball-dominating SG like Roy - he most certainly plays like a PG (that's the same kind of AST% you got from Mike Bibby playing next to Johnson, is Bibby not a PG not as well?). He played PG in College, he played PG in Washington, he played PG in Denver and he plays PG in Portland.

Again - I get it that you do not like Blake, I get it that you think that Sergio and JB were just as good as him this year - but the large sample sizes just disagree with you.

Picking and choosing what makes a PG based on small sample sizes and chosen opponents just does not make sense. Over a large sample size - it is clear that Sergio is a PG, it is clear that he is a gifted passer and it is also clear that he is a sub-par shooter, scorer and very bad at protecting the ball. A one dimensional PG is not a good NBA caliber PG.

Over a large sample size - it is clear that Blake is a PG but not an outstanding one, it is clear that he protects the ball very well in slow-pace and about as bad as Jarret Jack did when he played here in fast pace, he is a good shooter but he is not a good scorer nor is he good at attacking the rim. His assist% is acceptable for a PG, he protects the ball well, he can shoot the ball well and he does not make too many mistakes. Great NBA PG? No. NBA caliber PG - no doubt.

There is not a large enough sample size to really evaluate JB - and I am pretty sure that I went on record thinking we wasted the backup time on Sergio last year and JB should have got more burn - so I agree with you that JB could have been more effective last year if given consistent time - so there is a question mark there.

But, the only consistent PG we had last year that actually had acceptable statistics for an NBA PG over the entire year was Blake.

 

[Mediocre Man]

The numbers just do not agree with you. Blake's AST% of 25% is very acceptable for a PG. Is he a great one? No. Can we upgrade over him? Sure. But given that he has a 25% AST% when playing next to a ball-dominating SG like Roy - he most certainly plays like a PG (that's the same kind of AST% you got from Mike Bibby playing next to Johnson, is Bibby not a PG not as well?). He played PG in College, he played PG in Washington, he played PG in Denver and he plays PG in Portland.

Again - I get it that you do not like Blake, I get it that you think that Sergio and JB were just as good as him this year - but the large sample sizes just disagree with you.

Picking and choosing what makes a PG based on small sample sizes and chosen opponents just does not make sense. Over a large sample size - it is clear that Sergio is a PG, it is clear that he is a gifted passer and it is also clear that he is a sub-par shooter, scorer and very bad at protecting the ball. A one dimensional PG is not a good NBA caliber PG.

Over a large sample size - it is clear that Blake is a PG but not an outstanding one, it is clear that he protects the ball very well in slow-pace and about as bad as Jarret Jack did when he played here in fast pace, he is a good shooter but he is not a good scorer nor is he good at attacking the rim. His assist% is acceptable for a PG, he protects the ball well, he can shoot the ball well and he does not make too many mistakes. Great NBA PG? No. NBA caliber PG - no doubt.

There is not a large enough sample size to really evaluate JB - and I am pretty sure that I went on record thinking we wasted the backup time on Sergio last year and JB should have got more burn - so I agree with you that JB could have been more effective last year if given consistent time - so there is a question mark there.

But, the only consistent PG we had last year that actually had acceptable statistics for an NBA PG over the entire year was Blake.

Instead of you finding certain stats to back you up, and me countering with different stats to back me up, why don't we just agree to disagree.

 

[BlazersBlood]

The numbers just do not agree with you. Blake's AST% of 25% is very acceptable for a PG. Is he a great one? No. Can we upgrade over him? Sure. But given that he has a 25% AST% when playing next to a ball-dominating SG like Roy - he most certainly plays like a PG (that's the same kind of AST% you got from Mike Bibby playing next to Johnson, is Bibby not a PG not as well?). He played PG in College, he played PG in Washington, he played PG in Denver and he plays PG in Portland.

Again - I get it that you do not like Blake, I get it that you think that Sergio and JB were just as good as him this year - but the large sample sizes just disagree with you.

Picking and choosing what makes a PG based on small sample sizes and chosen opponents just does not make sense. Over a large sample size - it is clear that Sergio is a PG, it is clear that he is a gifted passer and it is also clear that he is a sub-par shooter, scorer and very bad at protecting the ball. A one dimensional PG is not a good NBA caliber PG.

Over a large sample size - it is clear that Blake is a PG but not an outstanding one, it is clear that he protects the ball very well in slow-pace and about as bad as Jarret Jack did when he played here in fast pace, he is a good shooter but he is not a good scorer nor is he good at attacking the rim. His assist% is acceptable for a PG, he protects the ball well, he can shoot the ball well and he does not make too many mistakes. Great NBA PG? No. NBA caliber PG - no doubt.

There is not a large enough sample size to really evaluate JB - and I am pretty sure that I went on record thinking we wasted the backup time on Sergio last year and JB should have got more burn - so I agree with you that JB could have been more effective last year if given consistent time - so there is a question mark there.

But, the only consistent PG we had last year that actually had acceptable statistics for an NBA PG over the entire year was Blake.

Everybody that has an issue with Blake is that he's not a risk taking PG. He knows his limits and he plays within himself. That's what makes him so efficient and his numbers look very respectable. But his limitations is what hinders the offense and it mainly comes down to his inability to take his man off the dribble. If he had the handles and the quickness, he could do many things for the offense such as:

1-Penetrate and collapse the defense to create for others
2-Finish at the rim
3-Draw fouls

Since Blake doesn't do any of that, we have to rely on Brandon EVERY time down the floor to create something. Most of Blake's assists come off of a pick n pop or swinging the ball around the arc. He does occasionally make a great pass, but he rarely takes chances. That is one of the main reasons why Nate loves him because he limits the turnovers, but it comes at the expense of putting pressure on the defense.

 

[andalusian]

Everybody that has an issue with Blake is that he's not a risk taking PG. He knows his limits and he plays within himself. That's what makes him so efficient and his numbers look very respectable. But his limitations is what hinders the offense and it mainly comes down to his inability to take his man off the dribble. If he had the handles and the quickness, he could do many things for the offense such as:

1-Penetrate and collapse the defense to create for others
2-Finish at the rim
3-Draw fouls

Since Blake doesn't do any of that, we have to rely on Brandon EVERY time down the floor to create something. Most of Blake's assists come off of a pick n pop or swinging the ball around the arc. He does occasionally make a great pass, but he rarely takes chances. That is one of the main reasons why Nate loves him because he limits the turnovers, but it comes at the expense of putting pressure on the defense.

I absolutely agree with each and every word of this. This does not change what I said. Blake is a PG. He is just not a great one.

 

[BlazersBlood]

I absolutely agree with each and every word of this. This does not change what I said. Blake is a PG. He is just not a great one.

Gotcha.

I would love Blake as a backup, but just not as a starter.

It's funny that we were all clamoring for more shooters years ago when our team was filled with a bunch of athletes, now we want more slashers. Hopefully KP finds the right balance for us....soon.

 

[andalusian]

Instead of you finding certain stats to back you up, and me countering with different stats to back me up, why don't we just agree to disagree.

We already disagree and know it buddy... What I am trying to point to you is that mathematically, your sample size is way too small and the opposition way too limited to make the interpretations you make with confidence... - while the data I gave you does not have these limitations.

For the record - I have no problems what so ever with anyone taking a knock at my basketball interpretations or knowledge - we disagree on something - no problems. But statistics and understanding their implications I actually do know very well... I have been in the industry for more than 20 years now...

Your basketball intuition might be right based on what you see - and time will tell us if you are right or wrong - but I have very little confidence, mathematically, in the interpretation of the limited opponent 13 games sample you present...

 

[Masbee]

Who said can't? I said doesn't -- Roy likes to play in the half-court and likes to evalute a set defense as he brings the ball up the floor before he attacks it and he's one of the best players in the league at doing it. It's not a knock, it's just his style of play (so far) in the NBA

Exactly.

54 wins playing that style of offense. Who the fuck are we to argue that Roy is wrong about his choices?

Name 10 guards/wings in the NBA that strike more terror in opposing defenses and coaches in the half-court set?

Shit, name 5. You can't do it.

Roy had the 4th best offensive rating in the entire NBA. (and Rudy was 11th and Blake was 13th)

When you have a bazooka in your arsenal, why the heck are you unholstering your sidearm?

Let's not fix what isn't broken.

Let's not redo our offense to a different style that has virtually NO CHANCE of being more effective than just about the best offense in the NBA. If a successful transformation was made, we would be different, but how could we be better than the top?

What is broken and what do we need?

A legit 3rd scoring option to lighten the load a bit on Roy and help spacing. Could be growth of young player already on roster. But, if we want to be more proactive in making sure, we need to try bringing in a stud in trade.

Perimeter defense. We need to slow and funnel dribble penetration so our team defense can function properly. That means getting a different point guard, assuming we don't want to put all our eggs in the "Bayless will turn into the PG of our dreams real soon" basket.

Backup big. We could use some toughness, energy and short-stint effectiveness coming off the bench - ideally in a package that can make a couple of offensive plays while they are out there. The Frye/Outlaw soft playing gunner at 4 experiment is OVER.