More news on Greg in Jerryd in Ohio

[Boob-No-More]

I really just don't get why folks think it is important at all to trade for some players buddy. The league has never been about that. It's about winning. If it's a good move for the team, great. But if it's just so they can have tea and crumpets together while off the court, fuck it. That's stupid.

Yeah, I view the BFF thing as an added bonus, but never the reason to acquire a player.

Regardless of his long time friendship with Oden, I wanted the Blazers to try to draft Conley in the 9 - 12 range back in 2007 (there were several trade rumors involving Jarrett Jack and teams picking in that range). I liked his athleticism and his ability to run an offense and distribute the ball. Of course, when it became apparent he was going to Memphis at No. 4, I knew we didn't have a chance to get him. The only big question mark back then was his jump shot - which he has improved dramatically.

I still think Conley would be a good fit in Portland, and the whole Oden buddies thing is just a nice added bonus.

BNM

 

[SteelBlaze1]

Yeah, I view the BFF thing as an added bonus, but never the reason to acquire a player.

Regardless of his long time friendship with Oden, I wanted the Blazers to try to draft Conley in the 9 - 12 range back in 2007 (there were several trade rumors involving Jarrett Jack and teams picking in that range). I liked his athleticism and his ability to run an offense and distribute the ball. Of course, when it became apparent he was going to Memphis at No. 4, I knew we didn't have a chance to get him. The only big question mark back then was his jump shot - which he has improved dramatically.

I still think Conley would be a good fit in Portland, and the whole Oden buddies thing is just a nice added bonus.

BNM

I would agree with that reasoning.

 

[Boob-No-More]

My thought was that Conley, being Oden's best friend, was always the target. But, with him and Bayless getting to be good friends, maybe we don't need to go after Conley.

I'd love to have them both (see my previous post on the Conley, Roy, Bayless 3-guard rotation). Conley is more of a "traditional" PG (I hate the term "pure PG") and a better distributor than Bayless. Bayless is more of a combo guard (a younger, more athletic, more intense version of Jarrett Jack) with more of a scorer's mentality. So, start Conley and Roy and let Bayless back-up both spots (eventually - you could start the season with a 4-man rotation with Blake backing up the point).

Now that Conley seems to have a good 3-point shot (0.406 for the season, 0.435 after the all-star break), he would be very well suited to playing alongside either Roy or Bayless. Conley is a little on the short side for a starting PG, but insanely athletic. Bayless is a bit small for a starting SG, but OK size for a back-up SG and excellent size for a back-up PG - and again insane athleticism.

I certainly think that with well defined rolls, Bayless and Conley could co-exist. Once Bayless is ready to back up both guard positions full time, the minutes breakdown at the guard spots could look something like:

Conley - 32-33 MPG
Roy - 36-37 MPG
Bayless - 28-30 MPG

That's plenty of PT to keep all three players happy. Bayless would play fewer minutes at the point (Blake would get those minutes) until he's shown he is ready to run the offense. But, with Blake around, that's not a big deal. The transition could be gradual. You wouldn't need to just throw Bayless out there and expect him to run the offense. Plus most of the minutes Bayless would spend at the point, he'd be paired with Roy at the 2 to help with distribution and running the offense.

BNM

 

[SteelBlaze1]

I like the idea of those three (Conley/Roy/Bayless) as our guards. I don't like those three plus Blake because as long as Nate is our coach (unless we get CP3), Blake will start.

 

[SteelBlaze1]

Your right, I forgot about Rudy also. He fits in no matter who we have here in my opinion.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I like the idea of those three (Conley/Roy/Bayless) as our guards. I don't like those three plus Blake because as long as Nate is our coach (unless we get CP3), Blake will start.

I know Nate is very loyal, but given the way Conley played after the all-star beark as a full-time starter in Memphis, I can't imagine him NOT beating out Blake as a starter - regardless of the coach.

The two areas where Blake is likely assumed to be better than Conley are 3-point shooting and turn overs. However, if you look at the actual stats, you will see that Conley, as a 2nd year PG was very close to Steve Blake in both of these areas. For the season Blake averaged 1.55 TO/G and Conley averaged 1.74 TO/G. In If you look at the stats over the 30 games Conley started after tha all-star break, Conley actually outshot Steve Blake from 3-point range (0.435 vs. 0.420). And those are Blakes two biggest assets. Conley also outperformed him in just about all other categories. Post all-star break, Mike Conley out shot Steve Blake from 2-point range, from 3-point range and from the FT line. He also got to the FT line 3x as much. He also out rebounded Blake, had 3 more assists in the same number of games and had twice as many steals.

At this point, the much younger Conley is as good as Steve Blake at the things Blake does best and is way better than him at everything else. He's clearly the better player today and given that he's only 21 years old with only two seasons of NBA experience ( a little over half that as a starter), he should continue to get better. I'm not a big "upside guy". So, even if I totally ignore Conley's "upside", I can't imagine any reason to start Steve Blake over him today.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

no rudy?

No, he was part of the proposed trade scenario (Outlaw, Rudy, Sergio, Martell and the 24th to the Grizz for Gay and Conley) that started this discussion.

BNM

 

[SteelBlaze1]

I know Nate is very loyal, but given the way Conley played after the all-star beark as a full-time starter in Memphis, I can't imagine him NOT beating out Blake as a starter - regardless of the coach.

The two areas where Blake is likely assumed to be better than Conley are 3-point shooting and turn overs. However, if you look at the actual stats, you will see that Conley, as a 2nd year PG was very close to Steve Blake in both of these areas. For the season Blake averaged 1.55 TO/G and Conley averaged 1.74 TO/G. In If you look at the stats over the 30 games Conley started after tha all-star break, Conley actually outshot Steve Blake from 3-point range (0.435 vs. 0.420). And those are Blakes two biggest assets. Conley also outperformed him in just about all other categories. Post all-star break, Mike Conley out shot Steve Blake from 2-point range, from 3-point range and from the FT line. He also got to the FT line 3x as much. He also out rebounded Blake, had 3 more assists in the same number of games and had twice as many steals.

At this point, the much younger Conley is as good as Steve Blake at the things Blake does best and is way better than him at everything else. He's clearly the better player today and given that he's only 21 years old with only two seasons of NBA experience ( a little over half that as a starter), he should continue to get better. I'm not a big "upside guy". So, even if I totally ignore Conley's "upside", I can't imagine any reason to start Steve Blake over him today.

BNM

You and I both agree that Conley is clearly the better choice, but it would boil down to two things:
1) Does Nate agree?
2) Does Blake take to the bench okay?

 

[Wheels]

You and I both agree that Conley is clearly the better choice, but it would boil down to two things:
1) Does Nate agree?
2) Does Blake take to the bench okay?

he seemed ok with it when the spot was given to J Jack for a few games a couple years ago.

 

[Boob-No-More]

You and I both agree that Conley is clearly the better choice, but it would boil down to two things:
1) Does Nate agree?
2) Does Blake take to the bench okay?

Nate's loyal, not stupid.

Blake has been a borderline starter most of his career. He's used to splitting time between starting and on the bench. He doesn't seem like the type to whine and cause problems. If he does, you ship him out. He's a borderline starting PG on a cheap, 1-year contract. Shouldn't be too hard to move if it proves necessary (which I don't think it will).

BNM

 

[SteelBlaze1]

That was a couple years ago and not after he just had the best season of his career.

I do think he probably would be okay with it if Conley was better and we were winning.

 

[Trader Ed]

I'd love to have them both (see my previous post on the Conley, Roy, Bayless 3-guard rotation). Conley is more of a "traditional" PG (I hate the term "pure PG") and a better distributor than Bayless. Bayless is more of a combo guard (a younger, more athletic, more intense version of Jarrett Jack) with more of a scorer's mentality. So, start Conley and Roy and let Bayless back-up both spots (eventually - you could start the season with a 4-man rotation with Blake backing up the point).

Now that Conley seems to have a good 3-point shot (0.406 for the season, 0.435 after the all-star break), he would be very well suited to playing alongside either Roy or Bayless. Conley is a little on the short side for a starting PG, but insanely athletic. Bayless is a bit small for a starting SG, but OK size for a back-up SG and excellent size for a back-up PG - and again insane athleticism.

I certainly think that with well defined rolls, Bayless and Conley could co-exist. Once Bayless is ready to back up both guard positions full time, the minutes breakdown at the guard spots could look something like:

Conley - 32-33 MPG
Roy - 36-37 MPG
Bayless - 28-30 MPG

That's plenty of PT to keep all three players happy. Bayless would play fewer minutes at the point (Blake would get those minutes) until he's shown he is ready to run the offense. But, with Blake around, that's not a big deal. The transition could be gradual. You wouldn't need to just throw Bayless out there and expect him to run the offense. Plus most of the minutes Bayless would spend at the point, he'd be paired with Roy at the 2 to help with distribution and running the offense.

BNM

I have thought that idea was good a while back at the deadline... works for me!

 

[THE HCP]

Just found out yesterday that asst. coach Canales is out there working out with them.

 

[Crimson the Cat]

No, he was part of the proposed trade scenario (Outlaw, Rudy, Sergio, Martell and the 24th to the Grizz for Gay and Conley) that started this discussion.

I really like the idea of that three guard rotation, but, and I may be undervaluing Gay, I'd rather just focus on a deal for Conley.

Something more along the lines of Outlaw & Sergio for Conley + filler, or, gasp, Rudy for Conley.

 

[Idog1976]

How stupid of us to not take this trade.

To be fair the trade also involved Sergio and some gravy if I remember correctly. Again, it was only a rumor never confirmed. At the time Outlaw was white hot and it was prior to his playoff "shrinkage" to quote George Castanza. Also Conley was looking shaky right before the deadline and went crazy after the All-Star break. In retrospect seems obvious now but let's not start lamenting MJ and Cp3 being passed over it's in the past. The real question is how do we get Conley NOW?

 

[Idog1976]

Originally Posted by Boob-No-More
I'd love to have them both (see my previous post on the Conley, Roy, Bayless 3-guard rotation). Conley is more of a "traditional" PG (I hate the term "pure PG") and a better distributor than Bayless. Bayless is more of a combo guard (a younger, more athletic, more intense version of Jarrett Jack) with more of a scorer's mentality. So, start Conley and Roy and let Bayless back-up both spots (eventually - you could start the season with a 4-man rotation with Blake backing up the point).

Now that Conley seems to have a good 3-point shot (0.406 for the season, 0.435 after the all-star break), he would be very well suited to playing alongside either Roy or Bayless. Conley is a little on the short side for a starting PG, but insanely athletic. Bayless is a bit small for a starting SG, but OK size for a back-up SG and excellent size for a back-up PG - and again insane athleticism.

I certainly think that with well defined rolls, Bayless and Conley could co-exist. Once Bayless is ready to back up both guard positions full time, the minutes breakdown at the guard spots could look something like:

Conley - 32-33 MPG
Roy - 36-37 MPG
Bayless - 28-30 MPG

That's plenty of PT to keep all three players happy. Bayless would play fewer minutes at the point (Blake would get those minutes) until he's shown he is ready to run the offense. But, with Blake around, that's not a big deal. The transition could be gradual. You wouldn't need to just throw Bayless out there and expect him to run the offense. Plus most of the minutes Bayless would spend at the point, he'd be paired with Roy at the 2 to help with distribution and running the offense.

BNM

I'm having trouble replying to this post due to typing with one hand after thinking about that 3 guard rotation. I'm not into getting Rudy Gay, as I think I would rather have Batum start for defense alongside Roy, Conley, LMA and Oden. We just need a spot up shooter and someone to cut along the baseline. Batum's defense would be even more valuable and his offensive output even less important with that line up.