Shabazz Napier?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
He looked good in the Utah game from what I've seen. I still think Turner will be our main PG back up, Lillard will be getting ca. 34 minutes per game, and a lot of the remaining will go to Turner, with Crabbe or Harkless slotting in for him at small forward. If Napier can take his chances though, Turner might be permanently glued to the small forward role and rotating there with Crabbe (who will have to share his minutes between small forward and shooting guard to justify his salary, I see him playing 25-30 mpg next season) and Harkless.. Thing is I reckon Turner will absolutely have to be used at PG for both Crabbe to Harkless to get enough minutes at SF.

I like that we are accumulating these assets though. Athletic point guard with decent shot is a very valuable player for any franchise.
 
Orion Bailey said:
Small sample size, but I watched him in person first preseason game, and I was so impressed, I could see him possibly becoming our solid backup point guard allowing CJ to be strictly shooting guard. Im still not the biggest fan of him playing PG with Dame out. I don't think CJ has enough options on the court when he is ball handling and Dame is out. I know ET is supposed to subsidize this, but I was not impressed by his PG plays, tossing balls into the back court. I know there is an adjustment period, but both guys are new to the roster and Napier outplayed ET big time. Is that possibly because ET has much heavier weights on his shoulders based on his salary?
Napier was quick and steady in traffic and has a really nice looking shot. I see him having an impact from the bench this season and becoming a regular rotation....if he can maintain that play.
Click to expand...

The problem with playing Napier with Dame or C.J. is on the other end of the court - same as it was with Frazier or Roberts. It makes our back court go from being undersized for an NBA team to being undersized for a high school team. Turner gives us a third ball handler/distributor with size that can pair nicely with either Dame or C.J. and not leave us with a subminiature back court.

I wouldn't worry about Turner's performance in the first preseason game. It was his first game action after the summer break with a new team - a combination of rust and unfamiliarity. Turner has proven he is capable of running an offense at an NBA level. Give him a couple more preseason games to get used to his new teammates and new system and he'll be fine. At the very least, he'll always be 6'7" and Napier will always be 6'1" (in heels).

BNM
 
Boob-No-More said:
The problem with playing Napier with Dame or C.J. is on the other end of the court - same as it was with Frazier or Roberts. It makes our back court go from being undersized for an NBA team to being undersized for a high school team. Turner gives us a third ball handler/distributor with size that can pair nicely with either Dame or C.J. and not leave us with a subminiature back court.

I wouldn't worry about Turner's performance in the first preseason game. It was his first game action after the summer break with a new team - a combination of rust and unfamiliarity. Turner has proven he is capable of running an offense at an NBA level. Give him a couple more preseason games to get used to his new teammates and new system and he'll be fine. At the very least, he'll always be 6'7" and Napier will always be 6'1" (in heels).

BNM
Click to expand...

I am hoping this is all it is as well. He signed the biggest contract of anyone not already on the team and im sure he feels pressure to come in and provide an instant impact. Napier, Ezili and all the others we brought in don't have those expectations. Im watching him closely though, because based on film footage from Boston, I was/am very confident he is what we need. Just left dissapointed after game one of preseason.
 
Orion Bailey said:
Great points... except, based on what I saw in the first preseason game, we are better off with the ball in his hands than ET.
Click to expand...

One preseason game. See my previous post.

Napier had summer league to become familiar with a new system. Turner did not.

Not worried. Turner ran back up PG in Boston the last two years and ran it well. There aren't exactly a lot of 6'7" guys who can average 5 apg coming off the bench.

Sounds like they are already missing Turner in BOS:

Boston Celtics Second Unit: Aggressive and Inefficient

"The Celtics need people to step on on offense with the second unit in order to make up for the loss of Evan Turner, their most important offensive instigator."

BNM
 
I'm not worried about Turner, and to be honest I'd rather have him running the offense than McCollum.
 
Napier was brought in case one of the other guards go down. He look good at the fan fest and first preseason game. But he look good with other quality guys in there but what I was watching is last 5 mins of the game when the bottom of the bench was in and losing the lead rapidly. I was waiting to see if Napier going to lead the way that didn't happen matter fact know one step up big. Yea Montero hit a big 3 that after he turn the ball over 2 times before that score. So do I trust Napier to control the game not yet.
 
Boob-No-More said:
One preseason game. See my previous post.

Did Napier have much of a summer league to become familiar with a new system. Turner did not.

Not worried. Turner ran back up PG in Boston the last two years and ran it well. There aren't exactly a lot of 6'7" guys who can average 5 apg coming off the bench.

Sounds like they are already missing Turner in BOS:

Boston Celtics Second Unit: Aggressive and Inefficient

"The Celtics need people to step on on offense with the second unit in order to make up for the loss of Evan Turner, their most important offensive instigator."

BNM
Click to expand...

Did Napier really have much of a summer league? He arrived late due to the trade, practice once before playing and getting hurt at the end of the first half.

I think he and Turner could work well together in the back court. Defensively it is better than Napier with Dame or CJ. But not really enough minutes for him if we want to keep ET in the backcourt while Crabbe and Harkless split the SF minutes.
 
Last edited:
Trackjack said:
Napier was brought in case one of the other guards go down. He look good at the fan fest and first preseason game. But he look good with other quality guys in there but what I was watching is last 5 mins of the game when the bottom of the bench was in and losing the lead rapidly. I was waiting to see if Napier going to lead the way that didn't happen matter fact know one step up big. Yea Montero hit a big 3 that after he turn the ball over 2 times before that score. So do I trust Napier to control the game not yet.
Click to expand...
I don't think Napier was in. Quarterman was.
 
I want Napier to be terrible so I can call him Shabust (like I do a certain other Shabazz). If he continues to play like he did in preseason game 1, I'll have to start calling him "Shabazz to the Bone!"
 
I also think Turner and CJ will get most of the back up time at PG. Napier might have scored 20 last night against the suns, but he did it by not passing the ball. I watched him, wondering if he could lead the bench, but I saw a predomentally selfish player. He's a shoot first guy, plays like an undersized SG.
 
Chris Craig said:
I also think Turner and CJ will get most of the back up time at PG. Napier might have scored 20 last night against the suns, but he did it by not passing the ball. I watched him, wondering if he could lead the bench, but I saw a predomentally selfish player. He's a shoot first guy, plays like an undersized SG.
Click to expand...

So like McCollum?

But seriously, Napier is a good passer we just haven't seen it yet.
 
Scalma said:
So like McCollum?

But seriously, Napier is a good passer we just haven't seen it yet.
Click to expand...

I saw him throw countless passes right to the suns. I don't see him as a good passer. He still has to prove it.
 
Last edited:
Chris Craig said:
I also think Turner and CJ will get most of the back up time at PG. Napier might have scored 20 last night against the suns, but he did it by not passing the ball. I watched him, wondering if he could lead the bench, but I saw a predominantly selfish player. He's a shoot first guy, plays like an undersized SG.
Click to expand...

I am not sure why that is a problem. In today's NBA, pass first PG's are usually PG's who can't shoot. They are a dying breed. Dying on the end of the bench.

Our offense is not based around one guard whose job it is to get everyone involved in the offense. The goal is to generate points on offense and if our guards are our best offensive weapons then why take the ball out of their hands? That seems counter productive to me. The end results should be getting good shots. As long as Napier is taking good shots I don't have a problem.

Your description of Napier has also been used by others in describing both Dame and CJ. And in those cases I don't see that as a problem either. Now if we had a big who was a good scorer down low it would be a different story. He would need to touch the ball. But we don't.

I actually want our guards to be selfish. Look at our starting line up of Dame, CJ, Harkless, Aminu, and Plumblee. Who do we want shooting? If Dame starts out the game by getting everyone involved....we will start off behind in every game. He and CJ need to be selfish. And as long as Napier is hot...he needs to look for his shot first when he is in with the 2nd unit.
 
Last edited:
Pinwheel1 said:
I am not sure why that is a problem. In today's NBA, pass first PG's are usually PG's who can't shoot. They are a dying breed. Dying on the end of the bench.

Our offense is not based around one guard whose job it is to get everyone involved in the offense. The goal is to generate points on offense and if our guards are our best offense weapons then why take the ball out of their hands? That seems counter productive to me. The end results should be getting good shots. As long as Napier is taking good shots I don't have a problem.

Your description of Napier has also been used by others in describing both Dame and CJ. And in those cases I don't see that as a problem either. Now if we had a big who was a good scorer down low it would be a different story. He would need to touch the ball. But we don't.

I actually want our guards to be selfish. Look at our starting line up of Dame, CJ, Harkless, Aminu, and Plumblee. Who do we want shooting? If Dame starts out the game by getting everyone involved....we will start off behind in every game. He and CJ need to be selfish. And as long as Napier is hot...he needs to look for his shot first when he is in with the 2nd unit.
Click to expand...

Makes a lot of sense. It's like in soccer, you want the player who's the best finisher to demand the ball. If they can't shoot then it's another story.
 
Last edited:
He looks decent as a gunner, and he may make me eat crow, but I don't see how he's an upgrade over Tim Frazier.
 
The thing is Dame and CJ know what they are doing. They can create their own shot, change their shot in the lane once it's contested, or once they are in the air. Napier is not exactly strong in this area. He takes highly contested shots when there are wide open guys. He slows the pace of the game because he is predictable and easily guarded.

That said, I see the potential for him to play at a higher level, but the Blazers play a team game, and he is not a team player. Dame and CJ take over games, take lots of shots because they are the Blazers main scorers. It's their role, not Napiers. He is supposed to run the bench, help keep them fluid, keep them from getting stagnant.
 
Napier's job right now is the same as Vonleh's. It's the same job Barton and Robinson had - be ready in case of a serious injury to a rotation player (or two).
 
Chris Craig said:
The thing is Dame and CJ know what they are doing. They can create their own shot, change their shot in the lane once it's contested, or once they are in the air. Napier is not exactly strong in this area. He takes highly contested shots when there are wide open guys. He slows the pace of the game because he is predictable and easily guarded.

That said, I see the potential for him to play at a higher level, but the Blazers play a team game, and he is not a team player. Dame and CJ take over games, take lots of shots because they are the Blazers main scorers. It's their role, not Napiers. He is supposed to run the bench, help keep them fluid, keep them from getting stagnant.
Click to expand...

I don't know.....it seems way too early to make any assessment (good or bad) on his game. We are talking two games in which he has been on the court with a variety of different players. I disagree on what his role is off the bench. Depending on who he is playing with, it may very well be his role is too score.
 
dviss1 said:
CJ was nothing short of spectacular running the team when Dame was hurt last year.
Click to expand...

It was Tim Frazier time.
CJ is a very good SG and an OK, at best, PG. He should be playing only SG.
Napier is a scoring PG, like Dame and like CJ. We need two of them on the floor for as much as possible. Even our best lineup with just 1 (Dame, AC, ET) lives much to be desired in terms of ball handling, running the offense, quickness, creativity, etc.
Our strength is playing two combo guards and we need to pursue this strength
 
Blazer4ever said:
It was Tim Frazier time.
CJ is a very good SG and an OK, at best, PG. He should be playing only SG.
Napier is a scoring PG, like Dame and like CJ. We need two of them on the floor for as much as possible. Even our best lineup with just 1 (Dame, AC, ET) lives much to be desired in terms of ball handling, running the offense, quickness, creativity, etc.
Our strength is playing two combo guards and we need to pursue this strength
Click to expand...

You make some valid points. Hell I said the same thing last year at this time. I only wanted CJ to play SG. And although he is still not a great PG, it worked. He proved me wrong.

As long as CJ has help getting the ball up court against pressure, the quickness and creativity of Napier becomes moot because regardless, when CJ is in the game without Dame, he is usually going to initiate the offense, because he is very effective when he has the ball in his hands. creating for himself. We don't want CJ on the court with the 2nd unit becoming a catch and shoot player. We have Crabbe for that.

So the question is would Napier really be running the offense along side CJ? I am not saying he would become useless in that scenario, but I think in Terry's mind ET can basically do the same thing as Napier (helping CJ out when he gets into trouble) and at the same time giving us a lot more size.
 
Chris Craig said:
The thing is Dame and CJ know what they are doing. They can create their own shot, change their shot in the lane once it's contested, or once they are in the air. Napier is not exactly strong in this area. He takes highly contested shots when there are wide open guys. He slows the pace of the game because he is predictable and easily guarded.

That said, I see the potential for him to play at a higher level, but the Blazers play a team game, and he is not a team player. Dame and CJ take over games, take lots of shots because they are the Blazers main scorers. It's their role, not Napiers. He is supposed to run the bench, help keep them fluid, keep them from getting stagnant.
Click to expand...

I disagree completely. Your idea of what a 3rd PG should do is probably not what Stotts wants. Evan Turner will probably be the main distributor off the bench. Napier is supposed to look for his shot.
 
Blazer4ever said:
It was Tim Frazier time.
CJ is a very good SG and an OK, at best, PG. He should be playing only SG.
Napier is a scoring PG, like Dame and like CJ. We need two of them on the floor for as much as possible. Even our best lineup with just 1 (Dame, AC, ET) lives much to be desired in terms of ball handling, running the offense, quickness, creativity, etc.
Our strength is playing two combo guards and we need to pursue this strength
Click to expand...

Blah blah, my point still holds true. CJ was spectacular when Dame was out.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
You make some valid points. Hell I said the same thing last year at this time. I only wanted CJ to play SG. And although he is still not a great PG, it worked. He proved me wrong.

As long as CJ has help getting the ball up court against pressure, the quickness and creativity of Napier becomes moot because regardless, when CJ is in the game without Dame, he is usually going to initiate the offense, because he is very effective when he has the ball in his hands. creating for himself. We don't want CJ on the court with the 2nd unit becoming a catch and shoot player. We have Crabbe for that.

So the question is would Napier really be running the offense along side CJ? I am not saying he would become useless in that scenario, but I think in Terry's mind ET can basically do the same thing as Napier (helping CJ out when he gets into trouble) and at the same time giving us a lot more size.
Click to expand...

Napier and CJ is better than just CJ. Even if both are score-first the combination of both would give us enough quickness, ball handling, ball distribution, etc.
What people don't understand is that AC and ET are SFs. Yes, they can pass, good decision makers but so was Batum and we didn't play him at the 2.
If we play just one of Dame, CJ, Napier, we actually play with just one guard
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SlyPokerDog
Shabazz Napier and the quote that keeps him going
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
bodyman5000 and 1
bodyman5000 and 1
BonesJones
  • Poll Poll
Five Shabazz Napier Trade Packages
Replies
16
Views
1K
BonesJones
BonesJones
KingSpeed
Shabazz Napier Speaks Up, Shows Out
Replies
4
Views
481
TBpup
TBpup
KingSpeed
Napier signs up to play with Ed Davis
2
Replies
59
Views
3K
Eastoff
Eastoff
Blazer4ever
Shabazz should be playing
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
tester551
tester551

Users who are viewing this thread

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