Hollinger with some words on Bledsoe and Sessions (who are on the block)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Nikolokolus

There's always next year
Joined
Sep 19, 2008
Messages
30,704
Likes
6,198
Points
113
Just because this team seems to be constantly searching for PGOtF and there have been rumors swirling around this team and one of these guys.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/PERDiem-120313/buyer-guide (insider only)

*snip*
Eric Bledsoe
The one trade chip the Los Angeles Clippers have left to play in their search for wing help, Bledsoe is a raw product with huge potential but no place to play with Chris Paul and Mo Williams in front of him on the depth chart. Athletically, he can hang with anybody in the league -- a powerfully built 6-1 guard with outstanding quickness and leaping ability. Those attributes make him a strong defender now and potentially an all-world one in a couple of years, which is why he has trade value.

Offensively, however, let's just call him a work in progress. He basically has no idea how to play point guard, turning the ball over on a ghastly 26 percent of his career possessions, and he's a poor outside shooter. His overwhelming athleticism can offset some of his mistakes, and an acquiring team might hope to have him play through the rough spots and develop in a pattern similar to Russell Westbrook's with the Oklahoma City Thunder. But, overall, this is a high-risk, high-reward play best suited to a rebuilding team.



Ramon Sessions
A classic pick-and-roll point guard who has produced consistently in his five-year career, Sessions is still only 25 and carries a very reasonable contract. However, he might opt out of the final season he's owed at $4.5 million and carries considerably less appeal as a rental. Nonetheless, several contending teams need help at point guard, and Sessions' combination of productivity and salary makes him a very tempting target.

Now, for the caveats. He's not a good spot-up shooter and needs the ball in his hands, making him a poor fit for the likes of the Lakers. He has improved defensively this season but had been ridiculously bad in previous campaigns, which is one reason his contract dollars are what they are. And, again, if he plays well, he's just going to walk as a free agent.

Those are the reasons teams are (currently) balking at the Cleveland Cavaliers' asking price of a first-round pick, but a couple of clubs seem desperate enough for quality point guard help that they ultimately might cough one up.
*snip*

Take it for what it's worth.
 
Bledsoe sounds like a good fit since we are...er should be a rebuilding team
 
Hmm, Crawford for Bledsoe, Felton to the Lakers for a #1 (which he would improve), and Wallace for another pick or two, we have a running start on a rebuild. I could get behind that strategy.
 
Hmm, Crawford for Bledsoe, Felton to the Lakers for a #1 (which he would improve), and Wallace for another pick or two, we have a running start on a rebuild. I could get behind that strategy.

You wouldn't by chance work in the Blazers front office, would you? They are the ones that need to get behind that strategy
 
Hmm, Crawford for Bledsoe, Felton to the Lakers for a #1 (which he would improve), and Wallace for another pick or two, we have a running start on a rebuild. I could get behind that strategy.

I could as well. I don't think management has the balls to pull the trigger on that though.
 
Hmm, Crawford for Bledsoe, Felton to the Lakers for a #1 (which he would improve), and Wallace for another pick or two, we have a running start on a rebuild. I could get behind that strategy.

If everything worked out that way that's about the best outcome I could imagine ... but if that does happen I don't want Nate anywhere near Bledsoe. He's going to need a real teacher to show him the way to play point guard and try to maximize whatever potential he has as a 1 (and there's no guarantee he'll ever be capable). Basically he needs a situation where a coach is going to be willing to live with mistakes for awhile and that aint Nate.
 
If everything worked out that way that's about the best outcome I could imagine ... but if that does happen I don't want Nate anywhere near Bledsoe. He's going to need a real teacher to show him the way to play point guard and try to maximize whatever potential he has as a 1 (and there's no guarantee he'll ever be capable). Basically he needs a situation where a coach is going to be willing to live with mistakes for awhile and that aint Nate.

I can't argue with you there; but the funny thing (to me) is that although we're all increasingly dissatisfied with Nate as the coach of a squad we hoped could take the next step to "contender" status, I think he really is the right type of coach for a rebuild. I just don't think we could do a second rebuild under the same guy.
 
I think I'm just tired of watching "Nate ball" but beyond that I know he would never be able to live with the inevitably steep learning curve Bledsoe would need to stop making boneheaded turnovers ... or least learn definitively if he can play the one at all. As Hollinger points out Bledsoe is a high-risk, high-reward player; the chance of him getting it and being able to become the next Russell Westbrook (even a poor man's version) are probably about 10-20%, but if he did get it ... that could be pretty good.
 
Hmm, Crawford for Bledsoe, Felton to the Lakers for a #1 (which he would improve), and Wallace for another pick or two, we have a running start on a rebuild. I could get behind that strategy.

Not a bad plan but just to play devil's advocate........Bledsoe is no starting PG, the laker's pick will be in the 20's, and anyone who wants Wallace to help put them over the top this year will also be a pick in the 20's. Those two picks and Bledsoe is also extra money added to our Cap this summer, with very little talent added.

I would still do it, but I would not be totally bummed if nothing happened. We need a PG badly and I just don't see Bledsoe as the one.
 
Eric Bledsoe
The one trade chip the Los Angeles Clippers have left to play in their search for wing help, Bledsoe is a raw product with huge potential but no place to play with Chris Paul and Mo Williams in front of him on the depth chart. Athletically, he can hang with anybody in the league -- a powerfully built 6-1 guard with outstanding quickness and leaping ability. Those attributes make him a strong defender now and potentially an all-world one in a couple of years, which is why he has trade value.

Offensively, however, let's just call him a work in progress. He basically has no idea how to play point guard, turning the ball over on a ghastly 26 percent of his career possessions, and he's a poor outside shooter. His overwhelming athleticism can offset some of his mistakes, and an acquiring team might hope to have him play through the rough spots and develop in a pattern similar to Russell Westbrook's with the Oklahoma City Thunder. But, overall, this is a high-risk, high-reward play best suited to a rebuilding team
.

What's the difference between Bledsoe and Bayless?
 
What's the difference between Bledsoe and Bayless?

Probably not much ... except for what MM had to say (and maybe that Bledsoe is a more physically gifted defender? -- long arms, etc.)

The only reason I was OK with moving Bayless is because he wanted out and probably was going to get more and more devalued the longer he was here and I think it had become clear that he wasn't going to be an especially good fit as long as Roy was here ... hindsight being 20/20 and all that, they probably would have been better off keeping him had we known beforehand that Roy's knees were going to explode.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top