Portland #5

[Minstrel]

Don't forget that Blake has the all-time NBA record for assists in a quarter.

For one quarter of his career, he was the greatest point guard in the history of the game. For all the other quarters in his career, he's been a good backup and sub-average starter.

It's a better basketball career than most of us will have, I guess.

 

[KingSpeed]

For one quarter of his career, he was the greatest point guard in the history of the game. For all the other quarters in his career, he's been a good backup and sub-average starter.

It's a better basketball career than most of us will have, I guess.

All other quarters? Did you see the third quarter vs Minnesota? A masterpiece. He could do that every game if given the opportunity but Blake usually defers to Roy because it's what he believes is best for the team.

 

[magnifier661]

He could do that every game if given the opportunity but Blake usually defers to Roy because it's what he believes is best for the team.

This reads like Blake should be the next CP3, but chooses to give Roy the glory. That was a little funny.

 

[KingSpeed]

This reads like Blake should be the next CP3, but chooses to give Roy the glory. That was a little funny.

Blake does sacrifice his game for Roy. That's a fact. Dude averaged 6.6 apg in Denver. He didn't suddenly get worse. His role was changed in Portland.

Hey, take a trip down memory lane (college days):

http://www.umterps.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/blake_steve01.html

"Steve Blake has done everything you can ask any point guard to do. Steveĺs been a three-year starter. Heĺs got a chance to become a leader of this yearĺs team. His experience from winning a national championship certainly makes him one of the top returning point guards in the country this year. Heĺs played against all of the great point guards that have played in the last three years. I donĺt think any point guard has done more for his team than Steve has done for our team. I think he is a definite All-America candidate for his senior year."

Dude won a championship at point guard.

 

[magnifier661]

Blake does sacrifice his game for Roy. That's a fact.

Hey, take a trip down memory lane:

http://www.umterps.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/blake_steve01.html

"Steve Blake has done everything you can ask any point guard to do. Steveĺs been a three-year starter. Heĺs got a chance to become a leader of this yearĺs team. His experience from winning a national championship certainly makes him one of the top returning point guards in the country this year. Heĺs played against all of the great point guards that have played in the last three years. I donĺt think any point guard has done more for his team than Steve has done for our team. I think he is a definite All-America candidate for his senior year."

Dude won a championship at point guard.

The dude had a chance to lead in Portland already, then was outplayed by Jack. This was when Roy wasn't on the team. I don't buy that. I think he's a decent role player, but no "star" like you suggest.

 

[Minstrel]

All other quarters?

Well, all other quarters combined and averaged, I suppose. He does have better and worse quarters.

Did you see the third quarter vs Minnesota? A masterpiece.

'Twas a nice quarter, indeed. You can't go very far wrong calling that quarter a very fine quarter.

He could do that every game if given the opportunity

I don't believe he could. Just as I don't think Martell Webster could continually reproduce his Quarter Of Doom versus Utah but chooses not to in order to help the team.

but Blake usually defers to Roy because it's what he believes is best for the team.

That's the most noble thing I've ever heard. Blake purposely trading in a star career for a journeyman's career because he believed it best for all the teams he's played for.

Blake might be the greatest hero in American history.

 

[PapaG]

I'm worried about Blake vs Miller because Miller "feeds the beast" and Blake doesn't. That's the point of the whole debate (at least for me).

That's a fallacy, at least according to the actual stats. I do realize that actual stats don't seem to matter to you, however.

 

[KingSpeed]

The dude had a chance to lead in Portland already, then was outplayed by Jack. This was when Roy wasn't on the team. I don't buy that. I think he's a decent role player, but no "star" like you suggest.

You got it the other way around. Jack started the 2007-2008 season. After three horrible games, Blake was made starting PG and has been ever since.

And I never suggested he was a star but it pisses me off when people say "Blake never gets the ball to Oden." It shows me who actually watches the game and who is too busy typing on this board to notice the intricacies of the game.

 

[KingSpeed]

I don't believe he could. Just as I don't think Martell Webster could continually reproduce his Quarter Of Doom versus Utah but chooses not to in order to help the team..

Actually, I believe Martell could reproduce that success if he was made the #1 option in the offense. That magical quarter didn't happen by accident. It happened because Roy got HURT and suddenly, we had to create shots for Martell. We ran him off screens, got him the ball, made him the #1 option, and he delivered.


I'm not saying that Marty would score average 96 ppg, but if Martell was treated like Rip Hamilton or Miller were in Detroit and Indiana, and run off screens and given shots, Martell could easily average 18-20 ppg.

But not everyone can be the #1 option on this team.

 

[KingSpeed]

That's the most noble thing I've ever heard. Blake purposely trading in a star career for a journeyman's career because he believed it best for all the teams he's played for.
.

Blake is not a star or a journeyman. He's a solid starter in this league. And if it was asked of him, he could average 7-8 apg at this point in his career (after all, he averaged 6.6 in his last season at Denver; he hasn't suddenly gotten worse), but that's not what we ask of him. We ask him to bring the ball up the court, give it to Roy, and stand behind the three point line. But in some scenarios, we choose to ride him and in those scenarios, he shines.

 

[Minstrel]

That magical quarter didn't happen by accident.

Of course not. As you said in that very sentence, it happened by magic.

I think you're discounting player variance. Every performance a player has isn't a stable level of performance that he could consistently have under some set of circumstances (unless we count "being more talented" as a set of circumstances). Players have certain talent-based medians and they deviate from it, above and below, from time to time. Very rarely, they will deviate from it massively. That's how you get "Tony Buckets" (as Tony Delk named himself after his 50+ point explosion). It doesn't mean that Tony Delk could be Tony Buckets if he was simply given the primary scorer role. It means that Delk had one night where everything was going right.

Blake has had a few quarters where everything was going right. Webster has had one quarter. Their established level of performance, though, is quite a bit different.

I'm not saying that Marty would score average 96 ppg, but if Martell was treated like Rip Hamilton or Miller were in Detroit and Indiana, and run off screens and given shots, Martell could easily average 18-20 ppg.

Well, you're perfectly entitled to your evaluation of Webster's talent. Personally, I think that the team has hoped for that for a while and has given Webster plenty of shots off screens. When he was drafted, he was expected to be a catch-and-shoot artist and the team certainly gave him opportunities. He wasn't buried on the bench. He averaged over 17 minutes per game as a 19 year old rookie and was over 20 minutes per game as a second year player. He was nearly averaging 30 minutes per game by year three.

I don't think Webster's failings come from lack of opportunity or having his game misunderstood.

 

[<-=*PdX*=->]

I only read mags post, but congrats to something positive being posted on this forum.

 

[THE HCP]

I only read mags post, but congrats to something positive being posted on this forum.

Like how the ducks are going to gang bang your beavers!

 

[mgb]

I'm worried about Blake vs Miller because Miller "feeds the beast" and Blake doesn't. That's the point of the whole debate (at least for me).

Blake learn from Miller though to feed Oden. He finally has done it the last couple games.

Now just keep feeding Oden!

 

[Natebishop3]

That's a fallacy, at least according to the actual stats. I do realize that actual stats don't seem to matter to you, however.

Why worry about stats when some of my favorite posters on this forum, judge players on a game by game basis and not on a season or a career?

I sometimes wonder if we secretly have Bill Walton posting on this forum.