"Is Jerryd Bayless the shot in the arm the Blazers need?" -Oregonian

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

RayDavies

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
458
Likes
3
Points
18
McMillan was none too pleased with Sergio Rodriguez during the Christmas night loss to Dallas. Sure, Sergio finished 4-for-4 from the field and had a nice backdoor pass to Rudy Fernandez, but McMillan played him only 2:05 of the second half. I asked him Friday why.

"Defense,'' McMillan said, a little more than a touch of disgust in his voice.

http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2008/12/is_jerryd_bayless_the_shot_in.html


This is exactly what I (and some others) have been saying!

Looks like Bayless' time may have come, and not a moment too soon... I hope the Quickster is right.
 
Well I have to say, watching that 5'10 no name PG for Dallas win the game untouched going to the basket, makes me think Bayless would have made a huge difference defending him!
 
Hmm,so Sergio is getting the axe for this lack of defense, yet Blake continues to log heavy minutes with his carelessness while handling the ball and decision making skills and his defense is not so hot either.
Whatever though, anything to get our stud rookie on the court.
 
Our PG defense has just been awful. Baron killed us, Rondo, the list is endless. Most uncontested layups and dunks. Bayless will atleast attack the PG!
 
I hope so. This has been a long time coming. I would be prepared for Rudy's production to drop a bit, since he hasn't played with him much so he doesn't have that "connection".
 
5'10" my ass! I've stood next to that guy before and he's more like 5'8"!
 
The way the game is called now by the refs, if Bayless "attacks" the opposing point guard on defense, he'll rack up fouls by the minute just like Oden, and they'll be right back to Blake/Sergio.

No, the way to neutralize a PG that is killing you is to attack HIM on your offensive end, and get HIM in foul trouble. This is the nature of today's NBA.
 
The way the game is called now by the refs, if Bayless "attacks" the opposing point guard on defense, he'll rack up fouls by the minute just like Oden, and they'll be right back to Blake/Sergio.

No, the way to neutralize a PG that is killing you is to attack HIM on your offensive end, and get HIM in foul trouble. This is the nature of today's NBA.


I agree. Bayless will struggle for the reason you stated and because of his lack of experience running the team. BUT........it is time. He needs to get some minutes. I watched Rondo last night against the Warriors and I am not sure who can stay with him ,but I know for sure Blake and Sergio can't. So you might as well get him some minutes against Toronto first, because we will need him for the next game.

We really need the finished version of Bayless right now. Unfortunately that won't come over night. But I think we need to work him in somehow. I wouldn't play three point guards in the same game. but I think i would alternate Sergio and Bayless every few games to give Bayless some experience.
 
Can someone explain to me what Blake's bringing to the table other than his quite good 42% 3pt percentage? For me personally, it's not defense, it's not being a "floor general", it's a lot of TO's when he tries to be a floor general or pass like the Spaniards, it's not a lot of FTs, b/c he doesn't drive to the hoop much.

Why are we talking about replacing Sergio's minutes with Bayless? Why not, if Bayless "needs to learn how to play with great players" (KP's quote, not mine), then why doesn't he put him Batum-like into the starting lineup for 15 min per game. If he's playing well, he gets more minutes. If not, Blake comes back in. Don't take Sergio's 10-15 mpg! He's a 21y/o PG with an elite skill. He's been working on his defense and shooting. Why bench him if we're "baking cake"?
 
Hmm,so Sergio is getting the axe for this lack of defense, yet Blake continues to log heavy minutes with his carelessness while handling the ball and decision making skills and his defense is not so hot either.
Blake is far from the end all be all PG, but with a more then 3 to 1 assist to turnover ratio he does take care of the ball. Combined with making over two 3's a game on 43% shooting from deep and dude is a pretty effective offensive PG in my view. His conservative game plays to his strengths and masks his average athleticism. There is no doubt his spot up shooting compliments Roy ability to drive.

I'm all for Bayless getting some more burn as the season moves along and having at least some of those minutes come from Steve. But with two rookies already in the starting lineup, I think it makes sense to play the steady effective vet PG and let the stud youngin watch SB and listen to coach Nate. He is much more athletic then Sergio and Steve and no one is more aware of this then Blazer management... his day is coming.

STOMP
 
Question, STOMP:

Let's assume you're right that Nate plays Blake and tells JB to watch him. What exactly is he learning? Blake doesn't really set up plays...his place of highest effectiveness is standing in the corner or on the wing and shooting a 3 (very similar to Webster last year). It's not like he's working angles to get the ball into the post more efficiently, or setting Roy up for an easier bucket, or anything. And I doubt there's anything on the defensive end Blake's teaching JB.

What would you imagine he's learning by watching Blake? And Oden watched Przy all last year, "scouting" opposing players. And he still looks pretty ineffective from time to time. What in the ceiling for what you can learn from the bench?
 
Hmm,so Sergio is getting the axe for this lack of defense, yet Blake continues to log heavy minutes with his carelessness while handling the ball and decision making skills and his defense is not so hot either.
Whatever though, anything to get our stud rookie on the court.

Exactly. McMillan is loyal to HIS guys. Jack was the guy last year, now it's Blake. But, if Jared can get more burn with Sergio on the bench, then work his way into the starting lineup, then maybe Sergio could replace Blake in the 2nd unit with Bayless starting.
 
Perhaps McMillan was thinking of putting Travis Outlaw ahead of Nicolas Batum.


This was my favorite part of the article.


Nate wants more defense so Quick mentions maybe Travis over Nicolas.....LOL

Travis is one of the worst overall defenders on the entire roster and Nicolas is one of the best.

This is the kinda thing that pisses me off about Nate. Blake is a horrible defender, yet Nate never says a word about him.
 
Question, STOMP:

Let's assume you're right that Nate plays Blake and tells JB to watch him. What exactly is he learning? Blake doesn't really set up plays...his place of highest effectiveness is standing in the corner or on the wing and shooting a 3 (very similar to Webster last year). It's not like he's working angles to get the ball into the post more efficiently, or setting Roy up for an easier bucket, or anything. And I doubt there's anything on the defensive end Blake's teaching JB.
you are exagerating so much it's hard to answer these questions without being sarcastic or condescending. Of course he sets up plays as he and Brandon share ball handling duties... dude doesn't luck into 4+ assists a game. While he does spread the court with his outside threat, comparing his play to Webster is absolutely ridiculous. His shooting from deep far outshines anything MW has ever produced. Martell's career Assist to TO ratio is a negative number not an excellent 3 to 1. Webster has a subpar handle for a Wing let alone a PG. And you really doubt that there are any vet tricks a limited athlete like Blake could teach a young player about guarding some of the best athletes in the game?
What would you imagine he's learning by watching Blake?
I don't know the guy, but here's guessing like most stud youngins he's pretty full of himself and used to taking over/getting his own shot. Sitting and watching should teach some humility and team first values, but SB has some things to impart as well. He keeps the ball moving, spreads the court by staying outside, and defers to other players keeping them in the game. Bayless will probably never be a "pure" point distributer which warts and all Blake is. While I welcome what adding his superior athleticism should bring to the club, I would also like him to retain the team first focus that Blake has... dude is nothing if not professional, smart and scrappy.

STOMP
 
This is the kinda thing that pisses me off about Nate. Blake is a horrible defender, yet Nate never says a word about him.

I don't think Blake is a "horrible defender". I think he is a pretty smart defender. Does he have a problem staying in front of the quicker PG's in the league? Sure, but what do you want, do you want Nate to ask Blake to become quicker? Not sure that would do much good. I am guessing that Nate gets a little more frustrated with the players that have mental lapses. I doubt that describes Blake.
 
The idea that Blake does not set up plays is ridiculous - he has 25% assist% which is very respectable for any PG playing next to a ball dominating SG like Roy. The idea that he creates as much as Webster is absurd - because in Webster's best year he had a 7% assist percent. For the record - even Rudy Fernandez who creates very well for a SG - is only at 12% - part of it is probably because he plays so much next to Sergio who dominates the ball - but it is clear that Blake is a prototypical PG and if you can't see it... well, it might be time for a new eye prescription.

Assist percent is the amount of points scored by the other 4 players playing with you because of assists from you.

(For the record, the black hole Travis Outlaw has a higher assist% than Webster - but that's an argument for another thread)
 
you are exagerating so much it's hard to answer these questions without being sarcastic or condescending. Of course he sets up plays as he and Brandon share ball handling duties... dude doesn't luck into 4+ assists a game. While he does spread the court with his outside threat, comparing his play to Webster is absolutely ridiculous. His shooting from deep far outshines anything MW has ever produced. Martell's career Assist to TO ratio is a negative number not an excellent 3 to 1. Webster has a subpar handle for a Wing let alone a PG. And you really doubt that there are any vet tricks a limited athlete like Blake could teach a young player about guarding some of the best athletes in the game?
I asked a question. That's hardly "exagerating (sic) so much it's hard to answer". Where are his assists coming from? Passing to an open jump shooter. Good for him. He's started to get the idea that passing the ball on the P&R to the big man is a smart idea. It only took him 25 games to do so. Good for him, I like seeing that. My comparison with Webster was in the "scoring" way. I submit to you that Blake shoots EVEN LESS from inside the 3pt line than Webster does. He rarely drives, and rarely finishes when he does. That's VERY Webster-like, and if you don't see that then we'll just have to agree to disagree. Just please don't make up that I'm exaggerating to make a point, and add your condescension to the discussion. So if you're OK with it, I'm leaving the Webster discussion where I wanted to leave it, showing that Blake's scoring skills are almost exactly as limited as Webster's were. Blake's superior handle has little bearing on the conversation if he's not using it--and I beg you to prove to me that Blake's using his handle to help out the offense. He scores by getting to the free throw extended and shooting a midrange jumper (which I"m fine with) or sitting outside the 3pt line.
I don't know the guy, but here's guessing like most stud youngins he's pretty full of himself and used to taking over/getting his own shot. Sitting and watching should teach some humility and team first values, but SB has some things to impart as well. He keeps the ball moving, spreads the court by staying outside, and defers to other players keeping them in the game. Bayless will probably never be a "pure" point distributer which warts and all Blake is. While I welcome what adding his superior athleticism should bring to the club, I would also like him to retain the team first focus that Blake has... dude is nothing if not professional, smart and scrappy.

STOMP
As a "pure point distributor" I'm going to point out some of Blake's warts, then. As a "pure point distributor" he's 31st among PGs in A/48. He's 9th in A/TO, tied with Alston, Miller and Brevin Knight with 2.98. Sergio, for instance, is at 2.78. Calderon leads at 4.38.

The last part answered my question from last post. If sitting and watching teaches him "team first values and humility", I'm all for it. "Spreading the court by staying outside" is not necessarily something I want my PG to do all the time, but I'm not a pro coach, so I'll defer to you and Nate on that. Blake being "professional, smart and scrappy" is great. If that's stuff he can impart while JB is on the bench, cool. That was my question.
 
Well I have to say, watching that 5'10 no name PG for Dallas win the game untouched going to the basket, makes me think Bayless would have made a huge difference defending him!

So far he is no name, but from what Ive seen of him he wont be no name for long
 
As a "pure point distributor" I'm going to point out some of Blake's warts, then. As a "pure point distributor" he's 31st among PGs in A/48.

Bad stat - he plays next to a ball dominating guard in Roy. What you really want to look at is assist% - and he is pretty decent there despite the fact that he plays next to Roy. Of course - with so many of Portland's points coming from iso plays and assists from Roy - 25% is very very respectable.
 
So far he is no name, but from what Ive seen of him he wont be no name for long

Barea shouldn't be a no name. He absolutely lit up the summer league the year before last. He played amazing.
 
This is the kinda thing that pisses me off about Nate. Blake is a horrible defender, yet Nate never says a word about him.

I wouldn't say horrible...but he certainly is not that much of an improvement over Sergio defensively that is for sure.....

and I thought Barea was blowing by Blake not Sergio in the 4th quarter....

and Outlaw is a HORRIBLE defender...oh sure if you ask him to freelance and offer some help defense he will come up with a spectacular defensive play here and there...but he is moire often than not clueless defensively when he is out there


The "6 year rookie"

:lol:
 
(For the record, the black hole Travis Outlaw has a higher assist% than Webster - but that's an argument for another thread)

Would you please stop using statistics and logic to back up your claims? :dunno:
 
PapaG, the two are not always the same.
 
PapaG, the two are not always the same.


Well, then all we are left with is opinion, and arguing opinions is like riding a merry-go-round.

What I thought when I read the stats posted was "wow, I didn't know Blake assisted on such a high percentage of baskets", and also "wow, did somebody REALLY try to make the argument that Webster was better at distributing"?

These are things that I think when confronted with raw data.
 
The answer to your second question was no.

Your first contention isn't necessarily true either. "Logic" can be used to read the same stat different ways. That's all I was saying.

Most of the time, you use stats to back up opinions you have by applying a form of logic to it to make the case fit. That's fine and dandy. I attempt, most of the time, to use stats to back up observations. So I'm pulling from two "factual" sources (video observation and statistical methods) while sometimes some in here use stats to attempt to justify a gut feeling.

Examples of Gut Feeling Stats: "Blake sucks, and here's the proof!" "Joel's a great center, and here's the proof!", "Sergio's horrible, look at his +/-"
Examples of Observation + Stats: "Joel looks like he's making a lot more baskets around the hoop this year. Oh wait, he's shooting 82% from close and dunk vs. 62% for his career". "Sergio seemed to play well on offense and team average on defense. Why's he getting called out? Here's the stat breakdown and play-by-play".

Etc.
 
The answer to your second question was no.

Your first contention isn't necessarily true either. "Logic" can be used to read the same stat different ways. That's all I was saying.

Most of the time, you use stats to back up opinions you have by applying a form of logic to it to make the case fit. That's fine and dandy. I attempt, most of the time, to use stats to back up observations. So I'm pulling from two "factual" sources (video observation and statistical methods) while sometimes some in here use stats to attempt to justify a gut feeling.

Examples of Gut Feeling Stats: "Blake sucks, and here's the proof!" "Joel's a great center, and here's the proof!", "Sergio's horrible, look at his +/-"
Examples of Observation + Stats: "Joel looks like he's making a lot more baskets around the hoop this year. Oh wait, he's shooting 82% from close and dunk vs. 62% for his career". "Sergio seemed to play well on offense and team average on defense. Why's he getting called out? Here's the stat breakdown and play-by-play".

Etc.


Eh, I'm bored and the kids are headed toward Bend with the grandparents while my wife is watching TLC downstairs.

Good points all, no complaints here.
 
LOL No worries. Enjoy the game.

Tonight i'm going to help out at the homeless shelter for maybe the last time. They need $1M for next year's budget or they'll have to close. Doesn't look like they'll get it. DVR for me tonight.
 
LOL No worries. Enjoy the game.

Tonight i'm going to help out at the homeless shelter for maybe the last time. They need $1M for next year's budget or they'll have to close. Doesn't look like they'll get it. DVR for me tonight.


Good for you. Where is the shelter? I don't have Comcast, so I can't watch the game.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top