Layman to T-Wolves

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
SwissBlazer said:
I wouldn't compare playing with a over .500 Blazers team to playing with a 17-65 Knicks team. If you exchange the two players is the difference in stats this big? Not sure IMO.
Click to expand...
This is a great point, that I keep forgetting to take into consideration. What kind of help does the player have, in getting those numbers....
 
SwissBlazer said:
I wouldn't compare playing with a over .500 Blazers team to playing with a 17-65 Knicks team. If you exchange the two players is the difference in stats this big? Not sure IMO.
Click to expand...
Same argument people made for Stauskas and Connaughton last year.
 
Wizard Mentor said:
Another Great Sign From Neil...

This offseason, and especially this move, shows that Neil learned something from the 2016 fiasco. He is now no longer OVERLY in love with his own draft picks.

He drafted Aminu, and let him walk.
He drafted Layman, and let him walk.

It's great to see this from the man who re-signed his own dudes for way too much $$$ in 2016.
Click to expand...
It's also his first off-season without Paul (rip). Who knows how much the summer of 2016 was influenced by allen.
 
Driew said:
And it's crazy that so much turnover is happening after a trip to the WCF instead of after we got swept by the Pelicans. I think NO realized that our current roster as constructed last year was at best a WCF team. To not get swept by the Warriors again he had to make some major changes. Hopefully it pays off--we shall see.
Click to expand...

I think it's mostly due to shitty 2016 contracts now being expiring deals and much easier to trade.
 
Jake did some things that few others on the Blazers did:

1. He SPRINTED down the court looking for opportunities. That didn't really fit here because the Blazers didn't run despite their youth.
2. He back cut better than anyone on the roster. That was great when teammates were looking for him. Often (CJ) they weren't.
3. Very good jumper off of one leg so he could cover a tremendous amount of ground during elevation.
4. Was constantly moving, probing, looking for gaps in the defense.

Jake did get a lot of points off of lobs, back-cuts or just quick direct cuts to the basket. That seems like a very good thing. However, there where countless times and often multiple times per game that he would make that cut, be WIDE OPEN and no one would get him the ball. What he was doing was giving the Blazers an opportunity for one of the easiest baskets you can get and they either missed him or flat out ignored him.

On the occasions when he did get the ball, it because often enough that teams included him in the scouting report and those opportunities declined. But that shouldn't have been the end of it. By adjusting, which in most cases meant going way under 2-4 players that Jake was cutting around while a big hedged out. It left a myriad of counters for Stotts and the Blazers to play off of. Not ONE SINGLE TIME did I see them take advantage of that. Either Jake would be wide open for a perimeter shot or one of the bigs that was out on the screen could have dove to the basket creating a huge mismatch.

They could have had Jake also reverse his cut back around the clump of players Jake was using to create a lob situation and now he has a staight line drive to the hoop (which he was quite good at) with a defender over committed to getting around to the other side to stop a lob. @BonesJones can likely speak to this in more detail.

Almost all of these will result in an easy look at the rim but for some reason, we never saw any of that after teams adjusted. As I've posted before, Stotts was often irritated even talking about Jake when media would have questions about him when he played well. For some reason, he just didn't seem like a Jake guy and with Hood/Baze/Mario/Little, it was going to be easy for Stotts to ignore him further.

So I'm glad for Jake he is going somewhere that someone wanted him and hope he gets the chance to build on the strengths he does have.
 
TBpup said:
Jake did some things that few others on the Blazers did:

1. He SPRINTED down the court looking for opportunities. That didn't really fit here because the Blazers didn't run despite their youth.
2. He back cut better than anyone on the roster. That was great when teammates were looking for him. Often (CJ) they weren't.
3. Very good jumper off of one leg so he could cover a tremendous amount of ground during elevation.
4. Was constantly moving, probing, looking for gaps in the defense.

Jake did get a lot of points off of lobs, back-cuts or just quick direct cuts to the basket. That seems like a very good thing. However, there where countless times and often multiple times per game that he would make that cut, be WIDE OPEN and no one would get him the ball. What he was doing was giving the Blazers an opportunity for one of the easiest baskets you can get and they either missed him or flat out ignored him.

On the occasions when he did get the ball, it because often enough that teams included him in the scouting report and those opportunities declined. But that shouldn't have been the end of it. By adjusting, which in most cases meant going way under 2-4 players that Jake was cutting around while a big hedged out. It left a myriad of counters for Stotts and the Blazers to play off of. Not ONE SINGLE TIME did I see them take advantage of that. Either Jake would be wide open for a perimeter shot or one of the bigs that was out on the screen could have dove to the basket creating a huge mismatch.

They could have had Jake also reverse his cut back around the clump of players Jake was using to create a lob situation and now he has a staight line drive to the hoop (which he was quite good at) with a defender over committed to getting around to the other side to stop a lob. @BonesJones can likely speak to this in more detail.

Almost all of these will result in an easy look at the rim but for some reason, we never saw any of that after teams adjusted. As I've posted before, Stotts was often irritated even talking about Jake when media would have questions about him when he played well. For some reason, he just didn't seem like a Jake guy and with Hood/Baze/Mario/Little, it was going to be easy for Stotts to ignore him further.

So I'm glad for Jake he is going somewhere that someone wanted him and hope he gets the chance to build on the strengths he does have.
Click to expand...
I liked Jake and he had some very fun moments, but he also had some big flaws in his game. The obvious one, was his defense but even offensively it seemed like once teams got tape of him and cut off some of the lobs he seemed to struggle. Then theres the shooting when he got going he could, really get going, but there was a reason teams left him open. They wanted him to shoot, because he was very inconsistent out there. So while I agree with much of the premise of your post, your conclusion is probably the right one, he was not part of the teams long term plans. It was in his best interest to move on.
 
BonesJones said:
He was 10x better than Stauskas.
Click to expand...

and Stauskas was out of the rotation before he was dealt so it's a non issue. You guys worry more about end of the bench/ end of rotation guys more than our main contributors.
 
"We're extremely appreciative of how hard Neil Olshey worked with us to accommodate what we were trying to accomplish in sign-and-trade," Bartelstein told ESPN. "The deal couldn't have happened without the Blazers looking out for Jake's best interests."

This is why they did it. Layman wanted to go and the Blazers helped him do just that.

"The deal will be part of a sign-and-trade that the Blazers agreed upon to accommodate Layman's desire to join the Timberwolves. Minnesota had the ability to sign Layman to an offer sheet, and Blazers president of basketball operations Neil Olshey allowed Layman the chance to join the Wolves without the aggravation of that process."
 
kjironman1 said:
Because he wanted to go to the T-Wolves.
If Portland forces his hand and keeps him then doesn't play him he becomes a problem. Layman wanted a better situation and he went there. Olshey found a way to make that happen.
Click to expand...

It amazes me how big of a deal is being made from this. Olshey brought in replacements that would have pushed Layman further down the ladder and the Blazers helped accommodate a better situation for him. I wish him well, but he's not a difference maker for this team.
 
CupWizier said:
It amazes me how big of a deal is being made from this. Olshey brought in replacements that would have pushed Layman further down the ladder and the Blazers helped accommodate a better situation for him. I wish him well, but he's not a difference maker for this team.
Click to expand...
Yep.
It's a better situation for Jake and the Blazers will fill the position and/or have roster spots now available for Vet mins and Waiver wire acquisitions .

I really don't see a problem with this at all.

Wish Jake all the best and congratulations on getting what i feel he is worth. I posted yesterday that he should get 12 over 3 years or so? That is what he got.
 
BonesJones said:
That's because Evan Turner was at the 4. Layman is a better option than Turner. Layman rebounded as well as Tolliver last year.
Click to expand...

I didn't claim layman was playing the 4.
I simply stated Jake Layman at the 4 will not help Portland not give up 21 offensive rebounds in a half/quarter in a playoff game.
Had nothing to do with Turner.

I seem to remember being told that Portland wouldn't get killed on the glass in the playoffs.
Was def fake news/alternative facts.
 
SIeepwalker said:
Wtf is the point of that post. Nothing to do with anything. Who the fuck is even that guy
Click to expand...

I find it funny when I read people giving Bones shit for actually trying to do something with his knowledge and having some ambition and drive.

jealous haters?

sounds like it anyhow....

Keep doin your thing Bones.
 
borim69 said:
Are we a better team then last year?
Ask yourself these questions .
1.Would you trade Kanter, Harkless and Leonard for Whiteside?
2.Aminu for Tolliver and Hezonja?
3.Turner for Bazemore?
4. Let Jake walk?
As far as I am concerned the only player we really lost is Kanter and I believe that is why he was given 6 minutes to make up his mind.
Jake may come back and bite us on the butt. Kudos to him if he does I wish him all the best but we just did not have the money to give him or the opportunity.

On paper we look better in reality we will find out next year. I do know one thing for certainty except for Kanter everyone else has done more for us by being traded then they have by playing for us.
Turner, Harkless and Aminu played well enough like that raise you get where it is just enough to put you in another tax bracket so you actually lose money
Click to expand...

You have to add Hood when you factor the loss of Kanter, because we couldn’t keep both.

So it was Kanter/Harkless/Leonard for Hood and Whiteside.
 
Orion Bailey said:
I find it funny when I read people giving Bones shit for actually trying to do something with his knowledge and having some ambition and drive.

jealous haters?

sounds like it anyhow....

Keep doin your thing Bones.
Click to expand...

Right? If I am not mistaken, Ben Golliver started out writing free stuff for BlazersEdge or whoever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sinobas
Parsons vs Layman
2 3
Replies
63
Views
8K
rasheedfan2005
rasheedfan2005
BonesJones
It's Time to Start Layman
2 3
Replies
82
Views
3K
TBpup
TBpup
Rastapopoulos
JAKE LAYMAN!
14 15 16
Replies
455
Views
41K
BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94
B
Five Second Violation
Jake Layman
2 3 4
Replies
115
Views
8K
hoopsjock
hoopsjock
THE HCP
Blazers @ T-Wolves 3/7/12 - Game Thread!
13 14 15
Replies
448
Views
12K
Fez Hammersticks
Fez Hammersticks

Users who are viewing this thread

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