Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think the entire premise of this thread - that we now know that Aldridge can't be a good #2 option because he was had trouble in this playoff series as a #1 option is flawed.
The test of a #2 option isn't how they perform as a #1 option. It's expected that the player won't be as good as a bona fide #1 option. That's to be expected.
That being said, I was disappointed with what we saw out of Aldridge in Games 2 and 3, but was really impressed with how he stepped up in Game 4.
Now, in Game 5, with Roy back, this will be the real test of how Aldridge is as a #2 option. Games on the line, the superstar is in the game, but you've got to play a big role to get a win.
What that tells me is that he is either (a) generally unmotivated, or (b) ridiculously inconsistent.
that wasn't the BR I'm used to seeing... much slower. While it will be useful to have another heady ballhandler who can hit a jumper on the floor, I didn't see him as anything close to being the #1 option. Thats probably LA for the rest of the playoffsNow, in Game 5, with Roy back, this will be the real test of how Aldridge is as a #2 option. Games on the line, the superstar is in the game, but you've got to play a big role to get a win.
According to Elias Sports Bureau, Aldridge's Game 4 performance of 31 points and 11 rebounds on 11-of-19 shooting made him the first in Blazers playoff history to have at least 30 points, 10 rebounds and shoot 50 percent from the field since Kevin Duckworth in Game 4 at Utah in the 1991 conference semifinals.
Interesting note in Quick's article:
Anyone who thinks that Aldridge is Rasheed Wallace is crazy. Sheed put up some GREAT numbers in the playoffs.
