To Roy or Not to Roy?

[magnifier661]

I'd set the over/under line at 12 minutes.

I'm thinking 20-25

 

[jlprk]

Play Roy 24 minutes; I noticed an odd grouping of about 10 wins when Roy plays between 23 and 25 minutes a night as a bench player. That seems to be his sweet spot.

The game 2 days ago was his worst of the season, in both efficiency points and eff per minute. The game before was his 4th-worst.

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketbal...players/brandon-roy/gamelog/11/25/362/1-1-eff

 

[Wizard Mentor]

Roy is a great star.... but he sucks as a role player. We need role players who consistently play D, hustle, rebound, and hit the open shot. Roy doesn't do any of these things consistently, some not at all.

Kudos to Nate for giving him a short leash. Some coaches wouldn't have the balls.

 

[Ed O]

I hope, like so many here, that Roy can adapt to being something less than an all-star... that is going to take time and shouldn't be something that we can expect in a single playoff series.

On the other hand, I don't think that the team should let the current Roy be "the man" by running plays for him and letting him work through slow starts. There are other options (Rudy, Wes) who have more things to offer as role players.

That leaves, to me, Nate putting him out there and seeing if he hits a few shots. If he doesn't, he should have a seat on the bench because his defense is poor and he's not a very willing passer nowadays. If he isn't hitting his shots, he's worthless.

Ed O.

 

[magnifier661]

I hope, like so many here, that Roy can adapt to being something less than an all-star... that is going to take time and shouldn't be something that we can expect in a single playoff series.

On the other hand, I don't think that the team should let the current Roy be "the man" by running plays for him and letting him work through slow starts. There are other options (Rudy, Wes) who have more things to offer as role players.

That leaves, to me, Nate putting him out there and seeing if he hits a few shots. If he doesn't, he should have a seat on the bench because his defense is poor and he's not a very willing passer nowadays. If he isn't hitting his shots, he's worthless.

Ed O.

What Nate should have done was work him in as a "role-player" during the season after surgery. Should have designed plays that utilized Roy off the ball, than expecting you to call "Superstar Roy Plays" and deliver with limited abilities and confidence. Nate set him up to fail, not purposely, but I really think Nate thought Roy would come back in old form.

If there is anything that Nate can work on this off-season, it would be to assess Roy's limitations, how can he make him somewhat effective, then design plays to fill that role. Too late now, but I have a sneaky suspicion that there is still one stellar game left in Roy before that role changes.

 

[Ed O]

What Nate should have done was work him in as a "role-player" during the season after surgery. Should have designed plays that utilized Roy off the ball, than expecting you to call "Superstar Roy Plays" and deliver with limited abilities and confidence. Nate set him up to fail, not purposely, but I really think Nate thought Roy would come back in old form.

If there is anything that Nate can work on this off-season, it would be to assess Roy's limitations, how can he make him somewhat effective, then design plays to fill that role. Too late now, but I have a sneaky suspicion that there is still one stellar game left in Roy before that role changes.

I did not mean to defend Nate with my post. I just am looking at what is best for the team now/tonight. And I don't think that letting Roy figure stuff out even if he's shooting poorly is the best thing for the team now.

Ed O.

 

[PapaG]

What Nate should have done was work him in as a "role-player" during the season after surgery. Should have designed plays that utilized Roy off the ball, than expecting you to call "Superstar Roy Plays" and deliver with limited abilities and confidence. Nate set him up to fail, not purposely, but I really think Nate thought Roy would come back in old form.

If there is anything that Nate can work on this off-season, it would be to assess Roy's limitations, how can he make him somewhat effective, then design plays to fill that role. Too late now, but I have a sneaky suspicion that there is still one stellar game left in Roy before that role changes.

I think Nate's focus was on making the playoffs, and I agree with that approach, if it was the case. Roy came into this season as a 3-time All-Star and franchise player. After this season, both Roy and Nate (and ownership as well) will have an entire offseason to reassess what Brandon's future role will be. What we do know is that he won't be the franchise player, and it will add some stabilization to next year, whatever next year ends up being because of the lock-out. It can't be easy to go from an elite player to a role player during a season, when practice is sporadic, and games are played to be won. An entire offseason (or more) will let all parties involved digest what happened to Brandon this year, and to better deal with that reality. In the fog of the season, and with lunatic fans on every side spouting their own opinions, dramatic change is not going to be perfected as a result.

 

[Minstrel]

I'm thinking 20-25

So you have the over. I'm shocked!

 

[Minstrel]

I think Nate's focus was on making the playoffs, and I agree with that approach, if it was the case. Roy came into this season as a 3-time All-Star and franchise player. After this season, both Roy and Nate (and ownership as well) will have an entire offseason to reassess what Brandon's future role will be.

I think more of Nate than you do and believe that he's capable of processing new information that comes in and realized long ago that Roy isn't an All-Star caliber and franchise player anymore and adjusted accordingly. I don't think he needed to wait til an entire season went past before "reassessing" and I don't think he did wait as you advocate.

 

[PapaG]

I think more of Nate than you do and believe that he's capable of processing new information that comes in and realized long ago that Roy isn't a 3-time All-Star caliber player or franchise player anymore and adjusted accordingly. I don't think he needed to wait til an entire season went past before "reassessing" and I don't think he did wait as you advocate.

I never posted any of that. Neat story, though.

 

[Minstrel]

I never posted any of that. Neat story, though.

You didn't post the first part, which is why I said I think more of Nate than you. Those were my opinions, not yours. Keep up.

The part that I attributed to you, that you advocated waiting for an entire season to go by before reassessing? You did post that:

Roy came into this season as a 3-time All-Star and franchise player. After this season, both Roy and Nate (and ownership as well) will have an entire offseason to reassess what Brandon's future role will be.

kthx bro

 

[PapaG]

You didn't post the first part, which is why I said I think more of Nate than you. Those were my opinions, not yours. Keep up.

The part that I attributed to you, that you advocated waiting for an entire season to go by before reassessing? You did post that:



kthx bro

Yeah, none of that has to do with how Nate coached him this season, though. I was responding to the poster who thought Nate should have experimented extensively with Roy during the year, which I disagree with, since the idea is to win games, during games. The reality is that my opinion for the most part mirrors yours, only that the organization won't have the uncertainty regarding Roy's role in terms of being a franchise player going into next season.

Again, neat story. Probably sounded tough when you typed it, too.

 

[magnifier661]

Again, neat story. Probably sounded tough when you typed it, too.

So the "Neat Story" is being sarcastic? How rude!

 

[STOMP]

Okay after thinking this over and over about Roy's struggles, I have come to a conclusion. And call me out if you think I'm full of shit.

after reading most of the threads/posts you've made, I'm just getting back to you that I think you are completely full of shit. Emotional and passionate about what you feel yes, but full of shit.

STOMP

 

[PapaG]

It's way too late for that "experiment", inactive list is better choice IMO Lets go with the horses that got us here

Yes, inactive list would be the best.

 

[PapaG]

Better not to play at all at this point, as others say it is too late now. And although Nate could have played him more in the regular season, he had other priorities also, like establishing an offense that included Wallace, like trying to get Rudy on track. I think Roy had enough of a chance and if he had shown something he would have got increased minutes.

And it's not about whether it is "unfair to expect Roy to contribute of Old"; it's about whether if's fair to us fans to not give the team it's best chance to succeed and for me, right now, that's to let other people play. I'm sorry that Roy hasn't been able to play through his mental blocks but I think that needs to wait until next preseason and season.

[video=youtube;0IXwmlkriqc]

 

[PapaG]

Frankly, we're a better team when he is not on the floor. But Nate is old school and old school says star players that don't have it anymore will always get to play- even if it means hurting the team.

What I meant to say was...

 

[PapaG]

Bench him...1st of all to send a message, that this is not the kind of a garbage that needs to be said when your team is down 0-2 in a playoff series. 2nd of all because he has looked horrible out there on the court.

You know if Brandon has a problem with his minutes then the solution is really simple...PRODUCE! Score, I mean for fuck's sake the guy is a 19ppg career scorer and he would have everyone believe that now he is unable to score? at all?????

Bullshit....

You don't hear Rudy, our other resident whiner, whining over his lack of playoff minutes now do you? I didn't hear Matthews whining about his lack of minutes in Game 1?

Selfish fucking egomaniac....that is what Roy comes off as, no matter how much Canzano & Quick try to defend him, the evidence is irrefutable...

and Canzano, this is the same guy who blasted the Blazers for not giving Roy a max deal from Day 1, how dare they question Roy's knees after ALL he has done for this franchise? Then he blasts Blazer management for signing Roy TO that max deal once he got hurt, how could they be so foolish to NOT know about his knees? and now he blasts McMillan for not playing Roy enough minutes when he has done NOTHING to warrant it...and believe me, he will be the FIRST to blast McMillan for "misusing" Roy as a reason for why the Blazers lost this series....

the guy (Canzano) is a fucking joke and a complete phony....and if Roy thinks that having Canzano write an article in favor of him is a good thing, he is sadly mistaken...

Dumbest. Post. Ever.

Just pure garbage, and I notice the author hasn't shown up today.

 

[PapaG]

Play Roy 24 minutes; I noticed an odd grouping of about 10 wins when Roy plays between 23 and 25 minutes a night as a bench player. That seems to be his sweet spot.

So, bring him in off the bench first. But, with some rules:

1. He needs Andre in there with him for all 24 minutes. Roy needs to be part of the offense, not initiating it.

2. Marcus Camby needs to be in there for 18 of the 24 minutes. With Roy in there, we lose someone else who could be rebounding or playing defense. Camby does both well enough to make up for Roy being in there.

3. Two of LMA or Wallace or Matthews or Batum need to be in there for all 24 minutes. Roy needs someone who can catch and shoot when he dishes. Catch shoot and make would be optimal.

4. Roy needs 6 minute stretches without worrying about being yanked. He needs time to warm up, and that means not worrying about if he can produce now now now. Next year, we can make him Steve Smith. This year, he's still Brandon Roy.

Great post, almost completely turned out to be accurate, and hit the minutes exactly.

I'd rep twice for this one if I could. Well done, BC.

 

[PapaG]

So the "Neat Story" is being sarcastic? How rude!

No more rude than completely misrepresenting my position, for the sole reason of trying to bait me.

 

[Minstrel]

Yeah, none of that has to do with how Nate coached him this season, though. I was responding to the poster who thought Nate should have experimented extensively with Roy during the year, which I disagree with, since the idea is to win games, during games.

Yes and I was saying that changing Roy's role on the fly would have been in service to "winning more games" since he was no longer the All-Star caliber player "he came into the season as" you put it. And that McMillan surely noticed that. Making your contention that McMillan was waiting for the off-season to "reassess" unlikely.

Again, neat story. Probably sounded tough when you typed it, too.

I am the Top Internet Tough Guy and I think I make that clear in every single post, which is my intention. Don't make me Internet beat you down.

 

[PapaG]

I am the Top Internet Tough Guy and I think I make that clear in every single post, which is my intention. Don't make me Internet beat you down.

I'm at my weakest right about now on any given day. Your mental pummelling of my mushy brain with your fancy words and your sneaky strawmen has me cyber-crying in the cyber-corner.

 

[Minstrel]

I'm at my weakest right about now on any given day. Your mental pummelling of my mushy brain with your fancy words and your sneaky strawmen has me cyber-crying in the cyber-corner.

Stop accusing me of making strawman arguments. That's mean.

 

[PapaG]

Stop accusing me of making strawman arguments. That's mean.

It's more rude than mean. Either way, stop making them.

 

[Minstrel]

It's more rude than mean. Either way, stop making them.

But...I'm not...

 

[PapaG]

But...I'm not...

Well, perhaps I didn't clarify my opinion so you could better understand it. Regardless, you misinterpreted it more than once. Some may call that a comprehension issue, but you're a bright guy, so the lead suspect is Sergeant Strawman.

 

[Minstrel]

Well, perhaps I didn't clarify my opinion so you could better understand it. Regardless, you misinterpreted it more than once. Some may call that a comprehension issue, but you're a bright guy, so the lead suspect is Sergeant Strawman.

Well, I think I'm bright ENOUGH (precise measurements of brightness are difficult) and I had no intention of misrepresenting you, so either you didn't communicate your position well enough, I didn't communicate my response well enough or you're backtracking now by claiming to be the victim of a strawman.

Lots of possibilities, we may never get to the bottom of this.

 

[magnifier661]

I love the Blazers

 

[Minstrel]

I love the Blazers

I hate them. And I hope Roy never plays another minute for the Blazers.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I hate them. And I hope Roy never plays another minute for the Blazers.