Let's Start Channing

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
B

BLAZER PROPHET

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
18,725
Likes
191
Points
63
Fry has proven he can play well when given good consistent minutes. The more he plays, the better he plays. When he starts for us he's a 16/10 player.

Rather than wasting time with Batum starting at SF this season while Webster recovers, why not start Fry? He may be slower than most SF's, but we can play a zone and he'll present a lot of matchup problems for defenders. Also, when our interior players switch on defense he'll have a good matchup and we'll have better interior defense.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
Fry has proven he can play well when given good consistent minutes. The more he plays, the better he plays. When he starts for us he's a 16/10 player.

Rather than wasting time with Batum starting at SF this season while Webster recovers, why not start Fry? He may be slower than most SF's, but we can play a zone and he'll present a lot of matchup problems for defenders. Also, when our interior players switch on defense he'll have a good matchup and we'll have better interior defense.
Click to expand...


Who's Fry?
 
I'm not a huge fan of that. Our switching hasn't caused problems with Batum guarding bigs, but when our PG is guarding PFs or Oden's out on a PG. That wouldn't change with Frye in.

Batum and Outlaw (when his heard's in it) seem to go a lot harder after rebounds than Channing. If anything, I'd like to see him get the backup minutes at center if Joel's out, so he can get his mind around being a rebounder, defender and paint player. But I'd really rather have Joel at 80% than Frye in extended C minutes.
 
The joke hit the ceiling as it went over your head.
 
We are not starting Channing, especially at small forward. And a zone defense is only effective in spurts in the NBA, you can't have a whole defensive game plan with a zone.
If Joel can't go, Frye will get his in the backup role. He has not shown anything lately to earn the PT though.
 
BatumKaboom said:
Yeah, who is Fry?
Click to expand...






fry9.gif
 
No thanks. Ugh.

We already have enough problem with opponents getting to the rim and getting fouled. Frye would be disasterous on the perimeter.

Ed O.
 
alex42083 said:
We are not starting Channing, especially at small forward. And a zone defense is only effective in spurts in the NBA, you can't have a whole defensive game plan with a zone.
If Joel can't go, Frye will get his in the backup role. He has not shown anything lately to earn the PT though.
Click to expand...

As we have seen with players like Outlaw, some players are better starters than coming off the bench abd visa-versa. Also, some players play better when given consistent playing time. Fre is one of those who play better when starting and/or getting consistent minutes. Since Nate is bungling his time off the bench and thereby hurting the team, maybe he could get smart and start him in place of a player who really isn't contributing much more then running around the floor.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
As we have seen with players like Outlaw, some players are better starters than coming off the bench abd visa-versa. Also, some players play better when given consistent playing time. Fre is one of those who play better when starting and/or getting consistent minutes. Since Nate is bungling his time off the bench and thereby hurting the team, maybe he could get smart and start him in place of a player who really isn't contributing much more then running around the floor.
Click to expand...

Dude. Frye is just not a very good player. It's not a matter of him being bungled. It's him playing like ass.

Ed O.
 
BP, for the record, it's Frye...with an 'e'. :)

So, yes, I do follow the team. :drumroll:
 
Frye as the starting small forward? Gah, my eyes! How about instead KP finds Chan-man a new home with some team who needs a 6'11" jump shooting power forward who doesn't play very good D?
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
As we have seen with players like Outlaw, some players are better starters than coming off the bench abd visa-versa. Also, some players play better when given consistent playing time. Fre is one of those who play better when starting and/or getting consistent minutes. Since Nate is bungling his time off the bench and thereby hurting the team, maybe he could get smart and start him in place of a player who really isn't contributing much more then running around the floor.
Click to expand...

I think we're doing just fine with Channing on the bench. With Outlaw, we NEED him every game and his contributions to win, which is why finding his role has been more of an emphasis than Channing's.

I'd much rather have Nicolas' defense, athleticism and energy for his 10-15 mins a game.
 
A bigger question, maybe I missed a thread somewhere, but why did his PT drop to 0 so fast. I heard of no injury, arrest, or locker room fight. I understand starting other bench guys who prove themselves, but Frye has played like 3 minutes in the last 5 or 6 games, which was a big change in the lineup with no apparent or visible cause.

Someone point me somewhere please. I am not complaining about Ike getting minutes, just curious... personally I like the swap. Something to do with the impending trade deadline?
 
LOTBfan said:
A bigger question, maybe I missed a thread somewhere, but why did his PT drop to 0 so fast. I heard of no injury, arrest, or locker room fight. I understand starting other bench guys who prove themselves, but Frye has played like 3 minutes in the last 5 or 6 games, which was a big change in the lineup with no apparent or visible cause.

Someone point me somewhere please. I am not complaining about Ike getting minutes, just curious... personally I like the swap. Something to do with the impending trade deadline?
Click to expand...

Just watch the Boston game in Boston. That was the boiling point. I think he had a stretch was he missed a jumper, fouled on the other end, turned the ball over, and looked intimidated as all hell out there.
He was mired in a shooting slump, which is his only real strength. Otherwise, he doesn't bring much out of the backup PF spot like hard-nosed defense or rebounding.
 
LOTBfan said:
A bigger question, maybe I missed a thread somewhere, but why did his PT drop to 0 so fast. I heard of no injury, arrest, or locker room fight. I understand starting other bench guys who prove themselves, but Frye has played like 3 minutes in the last 5 or 6 games, which was a big change in the lineup with no apparent or visible cause.

Someone point me somewhere please. I am not complaining about Ike getting minutes, just curious... personally I like the swap. Something to do with the impending trade deadline?
Click to expand...

At one point Nate said that he was going to use Ike as the backup 4, but after 1.5 games he went back to Frye. I don't understand why he would have given Diogu any sort of shot if he was going to judge him after such a short period of time.

They mentioned on the broadcast during the Celtics game that Nate had planned on using Ike because of Boston's bulk off the bench. I wish he would use Ike because of Frye's crappiness off the bench.

Ed O.
 
LOTBfan said:
A bigger question, maybe I missed a thread somewhere, but why did his PT drop to 0 so fast. I heard of no injury, arrest, or locker room fight. I understand starting other bench guys who prove themselves, but Frye has played like 3 minutes in the last 5 or 6 games, which was a big change in the lineup with no apparent or visible cause.

Someone point me somewhere please. I am not complaining about Ike getting minutes, just curious... personally I like the swap. Something to do with the impending trade deadline?
Click to expand...

His PT dropped as he was nor productive with the type of PT Nate was giving him. Sadly, Nate is not using him well at all.
 
Starting Frye at small forward would be a good way to turn a bad perimeter defense into one of the worst ever.

To off-set that, Frye would need to be LeBron James on offense. He's barely even Jerome James. I'll pass.
 
check out Frye on youtube, and you'll find an athletic player with a lot of potential.

check out Frye on the Blazers, and you'll find a player who can't move his feet AT ALL.

If Frye can get his mobility back (remember he was injured most of the preseason, and came
back early from his injury), he'll again become an interesting prospect. However, that is
a pretty big IF.

Until then, it's not fun seeing a player shoot 25 footers with defenders in his face. Right
now there are only 3 or 4 players in the league he can effectively guard.
 
Frye can be an okay player, but he is a mediocre rebounder and hasn't played well. Maybe you can play a three big man lineup like Detroit did with Wallace, Wallace and Okur, but that's because of their length, quickness and outside shooting ability. I don't feel that LMA or Frye really have the same ability to guard SF's like that. So no go.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
Fry has proven he can play well when given good consistent minutes. The more he plays, the better he plays. When he starts for us he's a 16/10 player.

Rather than wasting time with Batum starting at SF this season while Webster recovers, why not start Fry? He may be slower than most SF's, but we can play a zone and he'll present a lot of matchup problems for defenders. Also, when our interior players switch on defense he'll have a good matchup and we'll have better interior defense.
Click to expand...

The difference between Frye and Bayless is that the latter is 20, only played one season in college, is crazy athletic, and half of his mistakes are because he's barely played a minute in the NBA.

Frye, on the other hand, had 4 years in college, so he doesn't get quite the same benefit of the doubt for being raw, and he already has several years of declining contributions in the NBA. His skillset is pretty much set in stone at this point, and a perimeter PF is the last thing a already jump-shot happy team needs. He's also "blocked" by LMA, who is miles ahead of him, whereas Bayless is seen by many as the PG of the future.

I bet you if Bayless had been getting 10-15 minutes a game all season and was playing like he did against Boston, everyone would want him on the bench. However, I (and I don't think I'm alone) see some room for really short term progress from Bayless - it's unlikely that he remains so hesitant with his shot and sloppy with his passes.
 
number 10 said:
He's also "blocked" by LMA, who is miles ahead of him
Click to expand...

He wants to start Frye at small forward, actually. Which, IMO, is only a slightly worse idea that starting him at PG. ;)
 
Minstrel said:
He wants to start Frye at small forward, actually. Which, IMO, is only a slightly worse idea that starting him at PG. ;)
Click to expand...
forgot about that, but my point was that, since Bayless is seen by some as the PG of the future, it's worth accepting a few stupid turnovers if it helps him develop. I can see BLAZER PROPHET's point, but the analogy fails on quite a few levels.
 
Frye as the starting small forward? Gah, my eyes! How about instead KP finds Chan-man a new home with some team who needs a 6'11" jump shooting power forward who doesn't play very good D?
Click to expand...

This sums up my thoughts!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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