Suppose Blake went down (MERGED)

[Rastapopoulos]

...would you be happy with the idea of Bayless as our starter? Because right now, he's #1 backup. And Blake is recovering from surgery.

 

[ucatchtrout]

Re: Suppose Blake went down

If Blake goes down we'll be in the lottery.

Jerryd Bayless is not ready for the primetime, and may never be.

 

[Sedatedfork]

Re: Suppose Blake went down

I would feel more comfortable with a Rudy/Roy starting back court. Or how about Trout as Point-Forward!!!

 

[The Professional Fan]

Are the Blazers FORCED to acquire a backup PG?

The more I watch Bayless, the more I actually miss Sergio as the backup PG. Are the Blazers going to be forced to acquire a backup PG before the season starts? Bayless can have all the minutes he wants as a combo guard, but as the exclusive backup PG? No freaking way. He isn't ever going to be a "true" PG in this league. Do we HAVE to make a deal for a true backup PG, or can Rudy and Brandon handle the ball for us when Blake isn't on the floor? It's a stretch.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Re: Are the Blazers FORCED to acquire a backup PG?

You could merge this with my "What if Blake went down" thread.

I actually think we should get Koponen over. He showed last year that he can play alongside Bayless and supposedly he's developed into quite a defender over this past season in Italy, and at 6'5" he guards SGs. So he and Bayless can come off the bench together, Bayless does his head-down-crash-the-rim game and is happy and Koponen plays PG. Anyone know when the Euros start and Koponen will be playing PG for Finland?

 

[THE HCP]

Re: Suppose Blake went down

If Blake goes down we'll be in the lottery.

Jerryd Bayless is not ready for the primetime, and may never be.

If steve is the only thing keeping us from the lottery, why is everybody trying to trade him?

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Re: Are the Blazers FORCED to acquire a backup PG?

I would be happy if I knew that whoever it was visited Rudy and was working with him had told him: "you're going to be playing a lot of PG now - that's what you've got to work on".

 

[The Professional Fan]

Re: Are the Blazers FORCED to acquire a backup PG?

You could merge this with my "What if Blake went down" thread.

I actually think we should get Koponen over. He showed last year that he can play alongside Bayless and supposedly he's developed into quite a defender over this past season in Italy, and at 6'5" he guards SGs. So he and Bayless can come off the bench together, Bayless does his head-down-crash-the-rim game and is happy and Koponen plays PG. Anyone know when the Euros start and Koponen will be playing PG for Finland?

Haha, just noticed that thread after I posted. Merge is fine.

 

[<-=*PdX*=->]

Re: Suppose Blake went down

If steve is the only thing keeping us from the lottery, why is everybody trying to trade him?

Exactly.

 

[B-Roy]

This thread just screams overreaction.

 

[The Professional Fan]

This thread just screams overreaction.

Why is that? I think we've seen enough of Bayless to know he's not PG material. Doesn't mean he can't be affective in another role, and I believe he will be affective as a scoring guard. Just not a PG. Not our exclusive backup PG.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Since Bayless put up similar numbers to Blake when Blake was out with an injury, I would welcome it. It's not like we are going to win a championship this season anyway.


Bayless is playing with a bunch of scrubs, while being told to get those scrubs involved. Blake would look even worse than his shitty self if he were there instead of Bayless.


What should terrify everyone if Blake went dawn is that our back up would be Jeter or Mills.

Bayless is not the problem

 

[B-Roy]

Why is that? I think we've seen enough of Bayless to know he's not PG material. Doesn't mean he can't be affective in another role, and I believe he will be affective as a scoring guard. Just not a PG. Not our exclusive backup PG.

We've seen three summer league games where Bayless has been asked to take on a distributors role. The amount of people making judgments based on that is just baffling. To me at least.

 

[Idog1976]

Re: Are the Blazers FORCED to acquire a backup PG?

I would be happy if I knew that whoever it was visited Rudy and was working with him had told him: "you're going to be playing a lot of PG now - that's what you've got to work on".

That scares me more then Bayless at point by far. Bayless can re-learn to pass (he did it in HS) but Rudy has to pack in YEARS of dribbling practice into this summer. That seems unlikely what with all the hot european models he is banging in Mallorca. Looking on the bright side, maybe he can work on dribbling and "penetration" at the same time though!

 

[Ed O]

We've seen three summer league games where Bayless has been asked to take on a distributors role. The amount of people making judgments based on that is just baffling. To me at least.

Yes... and distribute to... whom?

Look at the Blazers roster. There's no significant talent there. Are there any former first rounders other than Bayless? Even considering draft position is not foolproof when looking at talent, the team is pretty weak without many shooters.

Ed O.

 

[B-Roy]

Yes... and distribute to... whom?

Look at the Blazers roster. There's no significant talent there. Are there any former first rounders other than Bayless? Even considering draft position is not foolproof when looking at talent, the team is pretty weak without many shooters.

Ed O.

Exactly.

The one thing that bothers me is the turnovers, but he won't be handling the ball as much in the regular season, and I believe turnovers can be cut down with experience.

 

[The Professional Fan]

We've seen three summer league games where Bayless has been asked to take on a distributors role. The amount of people making judgments based on that is just baffling. To me at least.

Huh? Wasn't he on our team last year? Did I dream that? I'm taking in to account last season in my opinion of Bayless, despite what he was "asked to do." It's pretty clear what kind of player he is. Doesn't mean he's bad, just means he's not a "true" PG.

 

[Tince]

Where are all the people form last year who were begging Nate to start Bayless?

 

[B-Roy]

Huh? Wasn't he on our team last year? Did I dream that? I'm taking in to account last season in my opinion of Bayless, despite what he was "asked to do." It's pretty clear what kind of player he is. Doesn't mean he's bad, just means he's not a "true" PG.

Bayless was asked to score last year, to put his head down and get to the basket. In Summer League, he played shooting guard, and in the regular season, he didn't play enough to show much of anything. It was not until THIS Summer League, that he was asked to become a distributor. He's going to look bad as he adjusts to playing a different style.

 

[The Professional Fan]

Bayless was asked to score last year, to put his head down and get to the basket. In Summer League, he played shooting guard, and in the regular season, he didn't play enough to show much of anything. It was not until THIS Summer League, that he was asked to become a distributor. He's going to look bad as he adjusts to playing a different style.

Ok. We'll see. Time will certainly distinguish who is right and who is wrong. Don't go in to hiding when you're proven wrong.

 

[B-Roy]

Ok. We'll see. Time will certainly distinguish who is right and who is wrong. Don't go in to hiding when you're proven wrong.

I never said Bayless would become a "pure" PG. And I realize there's a pretty good chance he doesn't become what the *fanbase* wants him to be. I just think that people judging a player based on three summer league games is absolutely ridiculous. At least we know why Pritchard and co are the ones evaluating talent and not the general fanbase.

 

[Ed O]

Where are all the people form last year who were begging Nate to start Bayless?

I didn't beg for it, but if he had started, how could the team be any worse off now? The team probably would have lost a couple of more games and ... lost in the first round.

In the mean time, Bayless would have got more experience and he wouldn't be reduced to passing to Bobby Jones to try to get an assist in summer league as a way to learn how to play the PG spot.

Ed O.

 

[Tince]

I didn't beg for it, but if he had started, how could the team be any worse off now? The team probably would have lost a couple of more games and ... lost in the first round.

In the mean time, Bayless would have got more experience and he wouldn't be reduced to passing to Bobby Jones to try to get an assist in summer league as a way to learn how to play the PG spot.

Ed O.

Props for stepping up and admitting you were one of a large group of people who have become increasing quite about Bayless.

Hindsight being 20/20, do you agree that Nate did the right thing by sticking with Blake?

 

[Ed O]

Props for stepping up and admitting you were one of a large group of people who have become increasing quite about Bayless.

Hindsight being 20/20, do you agree that Nate did the right thing by sticking with Blake?

I don't think I'm being quiet about Bayless. I've admitted in several posts that he's playing poorly... I think it's because he's going through growing pains, trying to be a distributor on a team without any other scorers. Also I would prefer people to remember that he's still 20 years old... over a year younger than both Cunningham and Pendergraph.

Defending him in the Bayless-bashing threads is simply not something that I'm going to spend any time or energy doing.

Regarding Bayless starting, at the time, while I would have preferred to see Bayless playing backup, I didn't think that starting him over Blake was wise... the team was pushing for HCA and I thought that HCA gave us a great shot to advance beyond the first round.

WITH hindsight? I think Nate did the wrong thing by going with the veteran. I think we could have still made the playoffs with Bayless starting the last 20 or 30 games and I think we would have still lost in the first round.

Ed O.

 

[alex42083]

The Blazers will bring in a third-string veteran PG to training camp. No way we go into camp with Jeter (if he's even invited) as the lone hopeful. I'm not too worried about Jerryd either.. at least at this point in time. If the coaching staff told him to just go out and score 30 and be the SL MVP from last year, he could probably do it. But there'll be some rough times to him adjusting to being a better PG/SG combo guard.

 

[Minstrel]

The Blazers are not a lottery team if Blake goes down. Bayless isn't prepared to lead a team to glory, but he wouldn't be asked to. Roy would continue to be the facilitator of the offense and Bayless would get Blake's job: bring the ball up, pass to Roy, spot up somewhere. And defend your man. I don't believe Bayless would be substantially worse than Blake on defense and, on offense, his effectiveness in reprising the "Blake role" would depend on whether his shot has returned.

Blake's role is fairly minimal. Bayless would be given that same minimal role and, even if he were a bit worse at it, it wouldn't be a death blow.

 

[Tyler_Hansbrough]

I actually hope Blake goes down for a while so Bayless can start. If I was Nate I would give Bayless 25 minutes a game, at least.

 

[The Professional Fan]

I never said Bayless would become a "pure" PG. And I realize there's a pretty good chance he doesn't become what the *fanbase* wants him to be. I just think that people judging a player based on three summer league games is absolutely ridiculous. At least we know why Pritchard and co are the ones evaluating talent and not the general fanbase.

I already said I'm not judging him off three summer league games, and clearly the fanbase has nothing to do with it. The Blazers coaching staff wants him to a a PG. He isn't a PG. What does that have to do with the fanbase? And yes, I get that he's technically only been asked to play a PG role over the course of the last three summer league games. Doesn't change the fact that he isn't a pure PG. He just isn't. It's obvious. But I reiterate - that doesn't mean he can't be affective or good.

 

[LOTBfan]

I already said I'm not judging him off three summer league games, and clearly the fanbase has nothing to do with it. The Blazers coaching staff wants him to a a PG. He isn't a PG. What does that have to do with the fanbase? And yes, I get that he's technically only been asked to play a PG role over the course of the last three summer league games. Doesn't change the fact that he isn't a pure PG. He just isn't. It's obvious. But I reiterate - that doesn't mean he can't be affective or good.

Obvious to who, and based on what? His per 36 is right in line with Steve in most categories, higher in some, lower in others, but most people felt Blake was a point guard.

Arm chair scouts who KNOW what potential players have, without ever doing anything but watching their 2 to 3 minutes of junk time a game make me laugh. Your opinion based on a few biased minutes of play time unfortunately does not stand as proof of reality.

 

[LittleAlex]

Re: Suppose Blake went down

If steve is the only thing keeping us from the lottery, why is everybody trying to trade him?

He isn't.

If Blake went down, Portland could get some scrub old free agent point guard who could easily replace what Blake brings to the table.

Or play a Rudy/Roy back court.

Blake is pretty unimportant to the team, as evidenced last year when he went down and the team didn't miss a beat.