ROY comments on our offense - is there a problem here? (1 Viewer)

[e_blazer]

Ya don't think he needs to try and help make everyone else better and work within a system designed to do that? ISO ball won't get you out of the first rd, we have found that out, and we can't just decide to change our offense at playoff time. Sorry, but he needs to adjust some, this is not a good sign for happening that IMO.

You think that's what we've found out? I think we've found out that getting past a team like Houston, with both Yao and Artest at the top of their games, is a pretty tough thing to do for a team in its first playoffs and that getting by the Suns is also really tough to do without Oden or Przybilla and with Roy playing on one leg. But, yeah, I guess you could distill it all down to ISO not working if you want to.

 

[BGrantFan]

What's more important to you? Roy being an All-Star/All-NBA, or the team winning in the playoffs?

Teams win titles with superstars. The answer should be obvious. Let's get Roy's usage rate up in the 30s and see if we have one. If not, it's time to rebuild and find a new superstar.

 

[e_blazer]

What's more important to you? Roy being an All-Star/All-NBA, or the team winning in the playoffs?

I don't see that they're mutually exclusive at all. In fact, I think the odds of the Blazers winning in the playoffs is diminished if you don't play to your best player's strengths.

 

[BGrantFan]

I don't see that they're mutually exclusive at all. In fact, I think the odds of the Blazers winning in the playoffs is diminished if you don't play to your best player's strengths.

Would you please stop being so "thick-headed"?

 

[bemac]

I don't see that they're mutually exclusive at all. In fact, I think the odds of the Blazers winning in the playoffs is diminished if you don't play to your best player's strengths.

They are when you don't have a team around your best player who can do the only thing left to do....Shoot the three. For Roy to be happy, he wants players standing around the perimeter, waiting for him to kick it out with 3 seconds on the clock. We no longer have that team.

Yes, it was a way for him to get 5 assists per game, but now he will actually have to earn those assists.

Hopefully he can learn from Wesley...If you take Roy's ability, and combine it with the way Wesley plays basketball...That would be incredible.

 

[e_blazer]

Would you please stop being so "thick-headed"?

You're right. I should have said the odds "are" diminished, not "is".

Shameful.

 

[Natebishop3]

I don't see that they're mutually exclusive at all. In fact, I think the odds of the Blazers winning in the playoffs is diminished if you don't play to your best player's strengths.

I didn't say they were. I asked what's more important. Personally I think Roy has been very close-minded about changing his game. He was unhappy when the team was trying to work Oden into the offense last season, and he's unhappy now. If he wants to have the ball in his hands, we should just make him the damn point guard, teach him to be a better distributor, and trade Miller. I'm tired of this debate. It's obvious that Roy is never going to see the light on this one.

 

[BGrantFan]

For Roy to be happy, he wants players standing around the perimeter, waiting for him to kick it out with 3 seconds on the clock. .

What a bunch of bullshit. Plus, Wes is playing EXACTLY like Roy used to play right now.

 

[Minstrel]

So, as I read this, it appears to me that Roy should adjust his All-NBA game around what Andre Miller is best at doing?

No, what I'm saying is that there's no harm in exploring whether Roy has more gifts, because the more ways Roy can succeed, the more ways to also exploit the abilities of other players.

What if Roy is not an off-the-ball player?

Then you play the way the Blazers have played the last couple of years. I've already said several times in this thread that Roy may not have the ability to play off-the-ball, in which case the team shouldn't use him that way.

I simply think it's a mistake never to even try it. Great players should be challenged, by their coach, to see if they can extend themselves. The more versatile your best player is, the more things you can do as a team. That's all.

 

[BGrantFan]

It's obvious that Roy is never going to see the light on this one.

Maybe he has, and only a few of us agree?

 

[e_blazer]

They are when you don't have a team around your best player who can do the only thing left to do....Shoot the three. For Roy to be happy, he wants players standing around the perimeter, waiting for him to kick it out with 3 seconds on the clock. We no longer have that team.

Yes, it was a way for him to get 5 assists per game, but now he will actually have to earn those assists.

Hopefully he can learn from Wesley...If you take Roy's ability, and combine it with the way Wesley plays basketball...That would be incredible.

I'm not sure that "we no longer have that team". Miller's certainly not in Blake's league, or just about anybody else's for that matter, from 3-point land, but Wesley, Rudy, & Nic can all hit at a high percentage from distance. Also, I think that Oden's return (whenever it happens) is going to open up things for some inside hoops and create more space for Aldridge.

 

[BGrantFan]

Great players should be challenged, by their coach, to see if they can extend themselves. The more versatile your best player is, the more things you can do as a team. That's all.

I agree. Let's see if Roy can become a Wade or a Bryant. He doesn't have the ball enough at this point to make that determination.

 

[bemac]

Sweet, I missed the season when Roy was playing defense, and running the court.

 

[BGrantFan]

Sweet, I missed the season when Roy was playing defense, and running the court.

I already said Roy needs to improve on defense. Your earlier post said nothing about defense, though. You're all over the place.

 

[Natebishop3]

No, what I'm saying is that there's no harm in exploring whether Roy has more gifts, because the more ways Roy can succeed, the more ways to also exploit the abilities of other players.



Then you play the way the Blazers have played the last couple of years. I've already said several times in this thread that Roy may not have the ability to play off-the-ball, in which case the team shouldn't use him that way.

I simply think it's a mistake never to even try it. Great players should be challenged, by their coach, to see if they can extend themselves. The more versatile your best player is, the more things you can do as a team. That's all.

What are you talking about.... Michael Jordan never improved upon his game or strived to become a better ball player. He was content to simply be a super athletic dunk machine.

 

[bemac]

I think not....I said if Roy played like Wesley, with his talent, he would be a superstar. Wesley plays on both ends, and does not refuse to run up the court. Pretty specific.

 

[Minstrel]

But, as we have seen even this pre-season, Roy seems to disappear into the background with Miller handling the ball at the start of games

That may be, but when you give up when something is hard at first, you're guaranteeing a failure. It's a bit silly, IMO, to say "We tried it, it didn't work immediately, so clearly it can't work." I don't know what the right length of time is to give it a chance, but a few pre-season games seem awfully early to write it off as failed.

Roy is best when he controls the ball

Roy, as far as I can tell, has never attempted playing any other way. That could well be because he's incapable of it...it could also be because he's never been asked to and tried to get good at it.

Miller is what he is, at this point. I think his career has been long enough that he's well established what he can and can't do. Roy is young enough that I think it's still possible he may have more things he can do than he's shown. This is not an insult to Roy, it's the opposite: I (and probably the Blazers) feel he may still have potential. This argument seems to have taken on a tone of "Why do you want Roy to change?" as though it's hostility to Roy. It's very much the opposite. It's the hope that he can be an even better player. May as well find out.

At the end of the day, it's an efficiency game - Should Microsoft drop Office in order to make Bing more attractive?

Can you quote me someone who's suggested that Roy should "drop" his ball-handling game?

The correct analogy is whether Microsoft should devote all their resources to polishing Office endlessly, or whether they should diversify and try to make some money in other things, like search, while keeping Office as their core.

Again, it's an efficiency game. Roy should work more with the ball in his hands and improve on this facet of his game.

There are two types of efficiency, and I'm not sure your viewpoint fits either. There's more efficiency in maximizing Roy's abilities and efficiency in maximizing the team's offense. I think seeing whether Roy can play off the ball is both in his best interests and the team's.

Again, if he works on it and finds he can't do it--fine. There will be many minutes to be played in his career and he can play the rest of them the way he already has. If it turns out, like Kobe and Jordan, that he can also play off the ball...he's a better player and the Blazers are a more dangerous offense.

 

[BGrantFan]

What are you talking about.... Michael Jordan never improved upon his game or strived to become a better ball player. He was content to simply be a super athletic dunk machine.

Jordan never had a usage rate under 31.7 after his rookie season until his final year on the Wizards. HIs best WS season was when he had a usage rate of 34.1.

Why should Roy have the ball less? I just don't see how that makes the team better.

 

[BGrantFan]

I think not....I said if Roy played like Wesley, with his talent, he would be a superstar. Wesley plays on both ends, and does not refuse to run up the court. Pretty specific.

Roy is a much better offensive player than Matthews. Problem is, Matthews is allowed to play like Roy on offense during the preseason. I'd love to see Matthews' preseason usage %.

 

[BGrantFan]

Roy is young enough that I think it's still possible he may have more things he can do than he's shown.

I agree. Let's not shove a 3-time All-Star into an off-the-ball role. I want to see if Roy can be a Wade or a Bryant.

 

[Minstrel]

That's not Roy's game, though. We've seem him be a willing passer and a willing rebounder, even on the offensive boards. Why is his usage rate lower than the other All-NBA guards? Why do you and others seemingly want him to defer even more than he does already?

I'm asking these questions to you because I do respect your basketball intelligence. I know WHAT could make Roy have a higher usage rate, as you explained, but do you really think that is his game? I think he could be a 25 ppg/7-8 apg/4 rpg player if given the ball more often, and the team would be better off for it. I am "thick-headed" though, so take that into consideration.

Most of this I've addressed in my responses to you and andalusian, but to put it simply: I think Roy's greatest demonstrated strengths are his ability to get to the hoop and his ability to pass. Adding more elements to his game simply means his "game" will be more diverse. He may still go to his biggest strengths most of the time...but having other weapons in his pocket are good for both Roy and the Blazers.

I hate to keep harping on the example, but since this "side of the debate" keeps being framed as hostility to Roy: Was Jordan "deferring" when he spent large portions of games coming off screens to get backdoor passes or to catch and shoot? Is Kobe deferring on his many catch-and-shoots? It's not about deferring. It's about more ways to attack.

 

[Minstrel]

I agree. Let's not shove a 3-time All-Star into an off-the-ball role. I want to see if Roy can be a Wade or a Bryant.

Bryant does a lot off the ball. Wade doesn't because he's not a good shooter.

Jordan scored a ton off the ball.

Sure, let's not "shove our three-time All-Star" into a role that only losers like Jordan and Bryant utilized often.

 

[andalusian]

Again, if he works on it and finds he can't do it--fine. There will be many minutes to be played in his career and he can play the rest of them the way he already has. If it turns out, like Kobe and Jordan, that he can also play off the ball...he's a better player and the Blazers are a more dangerous offense.

I do not think we disagree generally, I just do not think that playing off the ball is the most important thing for Roy. He worked on it, and that's great, and we will see if he can "make money" on it, but at the same time, it is clear that Roy does not dominate the ball as much as other superstars in this league. There is nothing bad with Microsoft spending money on Search as long as they ensure they can make all there is to make from Office - and to be honest, we really do not know that we have got everything from what Roy can do if he is more ball dominant.

At the end of the day - if Roy tells us that he is going to do some stuff like last year, and some stuff that were done more 2 years ago when the team and Roy were more dominant, while also working on off-the ball catch and shoot - I see it as a good thing. Not as a doom and gloom thing.

 

[Minstrel]

I do not think we disagree generally, I just do not think that playing off the ball is the most important thing for Roy.

I don't know if it's the most important thing. Being able to use the team's best player in more ways is fairly important.

I think the most important thing for Roy is getting better on defense. On offense, I think he potentially has more gains he could realize from getting good at playing off the ball than by trying to squeeze slightly more out of what he's already great at. Gains are not linear...the better you get at something, the less you can improve at it. Diminishing returns. At some point, the returns of pouring more resources into your strength are less than you can realize by pouring resources into an area you are weak. That's why companies like Microsoft branch out.

Is Roy at that point? I have no idea. None. That's for him and the coaches to determine. I just am open to idea that playing off the ball can make Roy better and the Blazers better. This is the type of experimentation I support for pre-season. Figuring these things out.

 

[BGrantFan]

I think the most important thing for Roy is getting better on defense.

I agree. I already posted that in this thread. Which is why the criticism toward him deferring on offense does puzzle me. I don't understand it. If that makes me "thick-headed", so be it.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

What the hell is going on between Roy and Miller. These 2 have never sat down and had a conversation off the court. The leader of the team and the vet PG don't get together and talk about how to win with this roster? Heck Miller had that conversation with the Blazer brass . . .. Nate was impressed Miller knew so much about the Blazers and ideas about the roster. How is it that Roy and Miller have never discussed this?

I put this on both players . . . Miller has a history of this and Roy usually gets along with players, so I got to think Miller has set the tone, but Roy needs to be a bigger person get past whatever it is that is going on.

These two can play together. But right now it is Roy being all about Roy and Miller is being his usual anti-social self . . . .and I just can't believe the backcourt have never really sat down and talked . . . this is not normal, right?

 

[BGrantFan]

But right now it is Roy being all about Roy and Miller is being his anti-social self . . . .and I just can't believe the backcourt have never really sat down and talked . . . this is not normal, right?

Roy is on quoted record in embracing Weslely Matthews and what he can do for the team. Roy is even on record saying he can envision Matthews becoming a Martell/Outlaw buddy for Roy.

Miller grows out his hair in the summer. That's pretty much what I, and I'm guessing his teammates, know about him.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Anyone got a link to Roy's interview on 95.5?

 

[Bob Dobalina]

They are talking about it on the game now. I guess Roy sent a text to J. Quick. Making it clear this wasn't meant to be a selfish move. It's what he thinks is best for the team. I believe he believes that, I'm just not sure it's right.

 

[Bob Dobalina]

What the hell is going on between Roy and Miller. These 2 have never sat down and had a conversation off the court. The leader of the team and the vet PG don't get together and talk about how to win with this roster? Heck Miller had that conversation with the Blazer brass . . .. Nate was impressed Miller knew so much about the Blazers and ideas about the roster. How is it that Roy and Miller have never discussed this?

I put this on both players . . . Miller has a history of this and Roy usually gets along with players, so I got to think Miller has set the tone, but Roy needs to be a bigger person get past whatever it is that is going on.

These two can play together. But right now it is Roy being all about Roy and Miller is being his usual anti-social self . . . .and I just can't believe the backcourt have never really sat down and talked . . . this is not normal, right?

I agree with this. When I read at the start of camp that they hadn't yet talked off the court, I was shocked. Seems they both may be stubborn about it. I think McMillian should convince Roy to have a sit down with Andre.