Trade Jerryd Bayless

[Rastapopoulos]

We have too many players. The popular assumption is that this is easily fixed either by trading Rudy (but then, what about the player we get back?) or simply by waiving Patty Mills. Fine, but we also have weaknesses at backup PF and backup PG because (once again with emphasis) Bayless is not really a PG.

We've been having this conversation forever, but it seems to me that the pro-Bayless camp seems to think that his relatively good numbers in the playoffs (combined with Rudy's suckitude) are a reason to hang on to him as our PG in waiting. But that ignores the fact that his good numbers were playing primarily as a scorer, because Brandon was injured. So yes, he's a fairly decent backup SG, except turnover-prone, short and not really an outside shooter. And didn't we just spend big bucks on the bigger, better-defending, better 3 point shooting Wes Matthews?

Crazy as it sounds, I really think we should hang on to Rudy (at least until something better than the shit we've been offered is offered) and try to get something for Bayless. Part of the reason Rudy was so disappointing in his second season (I put it to you) is that he went from playing alongside a guy who knew him like the back of his hand and threw perfect alley-oops to him, to playing alongside a guy with tunnel vision who barely noticed he was there.

The trouble with trading Bayless, though, is that every other team is aware of his limitations. Whenever I try to think of teams that might like him, I just can't. The teams that need a PG need an actual PG. And the teams that need a SG - well, there just aren't that many. The best I can come up with is sad-sack teams like the Cavs who might be desperate for any kind of scoring and excitement, and who might want to unload some veterans who were useful on a championship-contending team, but less so on a rebuilding team. (So, for example, if we could get Varejao for Bayless + ?, I would be ecstatic.)

Another reason I want to get rid of Bayless is that he just doesn't seem to be a "piece" that can work well with another group of players. We saw against the Suns that the right-constructed group off the bench can be greater than the sum of their parts. Dragic, Dudley and Amundson wreaked havoc for the Suns all year and had great chemistry. Whereas I've always seen Bayless as like Corey Maggette: somebody who can fairly reliably put up numbers, but who sort of operates in a vacuum and doesn't really contribute to wins.

Long story short, if there's one player I want moved before the season starts, it's Bayless. But I can't really think of a trade that makes sense to both sides.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I didn't give reasons for hanging on to Rudy, so here they are: he is a team player. Maybe that seems ironic giving the whinging we've heard this summer from his agent, but if you watch him play he's almost unselfish to a fault. In fact, I think that's what was hurting him in the playoffs: he was too often thinking of moving the ball rather than simply shooting it (the Mike Miller problem). In watching him over the past two seasons, I think our big men will miss him if and when he goes, because he is one of the few wing players who looks to, and often creatively manages to, feed the post. Watch any Oden or Aldridge highlights reel and I guarantee you'll see at least a couple of very creative feeds/alley-oops from Rudy. But if you see any from Bayless, let me know.

 

[Wheels]

DERP

as I learned over at SCUSA....

 

[THE HCP]

No!

 

[PtldPlatypus]

My first thought for a trade destination is a revisitation of the oft-discussed Bayless-for-Conley trade idea, simply because OJ Mayo has repeatedly stated that he wants to be a point guard, and I could see Mayo and Bayless working--either that or combusting spontaneously; either way it would be interesting. Also, Phoenix could be a potential partner, because they really have no SG's other than Jason Richardson, and since he (much like Frye) is an Arizona guy, he and the Suns' fans would be happy with that result.

However, I still can't shake the notion that we've never--never--seen what would happen with a Bayless-Roy pairing in the starting lineup. I understand that "Bayless isn't a point guard", but what he is is a talented player with a skill-set seemingly perfectly matched with Roy's, if only he could become a reliable outside threat. As much as I understand and somewhat agree with your premise, I still feel like it's too early to throw in the towel on a guard pairing that could be one of the league's most dynamic if it ever happened.

 

[Further]

Bayless has his faults, but remember how terrible he was his rookie season compared to last year. The man is really improving. In a young guy, I look for a few things, and two of the most important are consistent improvement and drive. His FG went up from .365 to .414, his 3pt from .259 to .315, his FT from .806 to .831. His PER went up from 8.2 to 14.3, that's a huge fucking jump and a great sign. His TS from .487 to .534, his per36 rebounds, assists and points all went up while his turnovers went down.

And even if he is not optimal at PG (yet), who would you have back up Miller? Mills? AJ? Mills was total horseshit last year and AJ is a complete unknown. Move Roy over? that's fine for stints, but not over a full season. Rudy? He is a good passer, but has not shown the ability to lead the team, and has already shown that he is not going to be here for the long term.

If a trade comes along that nets us a better or more true PG, I would be open to trading JB, but not to make time for Rudy and certainly not to keep the disastrous Patty Mills.

 

[MrSelfDestruct]

So trade a player who, rather than complaining about not getting minutes, worked on his game to EARN the minutes. Yet we should keep a player who not only does the opposite but plays no defense, can't create his own shot and doesn't want to be in Portland?

Sounds like a great idea.

PG or not, with Bayless gone, who is creating their own shot off the bench?

 

[Mediocre Man]

Fuck Rudy.


Get rid of his Euro ass at all cost. I'd much rather trade him for nothing, than Bayless for a "like piece". Hopefully McScribbles will be gone after this year, and Bayless will be able to play more. He has proven that with time, he can produce.

 

[blazerboy30]

This is atrocious reasoning.

You say we should trade Bayless because he was productive and stepped up his game when Roy was out. And we should keep Rudy even though he wasn't productive when Roy was out, because he was missing Sergio?

Wow.

 

[hasoos]

You don't trade a player just because you have "too many players". Every team has guys who are going to ride the pine, and they aren't going to like it if they are any type of competitor at all. That's tough cookies. I really feel bad that they have to earn hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars per year to play basketball and rarely get into games.

Every team has the same roster size.
Every team has players who want to play but aren't up to snuff to get playing time.

You don't trade away a good player, to keep a bad one.

 

[STOMP]

Bayless has his faults, but remember how terrible he was his rookie season compared to last year. The man is really improving. In a young guy, I look for a few things, and two of the most important are consistent improvement and drive. His FG went up from .365 to .414, his 3pt from .259 to .315, his FT from .806 to .831. His PER went up from 8.2 to 14.3, that's a huge fucking jump and a great sign. His TS from .487 to .534, his per36 rebounds, assists and points all went up while his turnovers went down.

if Jerryd can improve only half as much over last year as he did from year one to two he'll become a pretty valuable part of this team. The biggest key for him is to continue to improve on his ability to knock down open jumpers. He doesn't need to be Steve Kerr, but dude does need to shoot at least 35% from deep to spread the court. Getting defenders to respect his outside shot not only spreads out the defense to the benefit of the overall offense, but will make his ability to drive that much more effective. And when opposing Bigs have to collapse on his drives they leave their man open for drop down dunks or at least free to feast on offensive boards.

While I don't see now as the time to deal him, I'd move anyone on the roster if the right offer came along. If the offer for Bayless is a future pick (so as to thin the roster a bit), I'm not sure how great Rudy would be guarding PGs if he were to be plugged into JB's minutes void... then again, how great was Steve Kerr at guarding PGs?

STOMP

 

[PtldPlatypus]

You don't trade a player just because you have "too many players". Every team has guys who are going to ride the pine, and they aren't going to like it if they are any type of competitor at all. That's tough cookies. I really feel bad that they have to earn hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars per year to play basketball and rarely get into games.

Every team has the same roster size.
Every team has players who want to play but aren't up to snuff to get playing time.

You don't trade away a good player, to keep a bad one.

Not to mention that in all honesty, 5 of our players are 1st/2nd year guys who really shouldn't be expecting any PT anyway (unless there are injuries). Really, we've got 10 guys competing for 240 minutes, and we know that Roy, Aldridge, and Miller have about 100 of those locked up, leaving 140/game for the other 7, which is not necessarily an untenable situation.

IMO, the biggest problem is the amount of money committed to 3 of our backups--Camby/Joel/Matthews make a combined $23M+ this year--meaning that all of them (if healthy) will get PT. Rudy and Bayless are basically held hostage by their contracts; they're cheap and they're still locked up, which means that they basically have to take what they're given and like it, and if they don't play much...well, it doesn't cost much to have them keep a seat warm. Sucks for them, but that's life in the NBA.

 

[mook]

Bayless kind of reminds me of a young Jamal Crawford:
http://www.basketball-reference.com...m=1&p1=bayleje01&y1=2010&p2=crawfja01&y2=2004

But that's Crawford's fourth year (age 23) compared to Bayless' second (age 21).

I love the growth curve Bayless has shown so far, though. I'm definitely in no hurry to unload him.

But if we do make a deal for a true young PG, he's got to be in the package.

 

[Draco]

I’d be open to trading Bayless if we could get a good player in return. Cleveland is an interesting team, if they eventually decide to rebuild maybe we could make a run at Mo Williams. I don’t think Bayless alone would be enough for the Cavs right now, but if that type of deal presents itself than sure we should look into it. I think of Bayless as being at a similar spot to Travis Outlaw a few seasons ago, a valuable contributor off the bench who has some major deficiencies in his game. Not good enough to be a starter but valuable enough to contribute more than roster spots 10-15. The team will still be fine just hanging on to Bayless, especially if there is an injury he will be an acceptable replacement. But as we were able to flip Outlaw for the much more valuable Camby, if a similar upgrade is offered our team should jump all over it.

 

[Nhawz]

So trade a player who, rather than complaining about not getting minutes, worked on his game to EARN the minutes. Yet we should keep a player who not only does the opposite but plays no defense, can't create his own shot and doesn't want to be in Portland?

Sounds like a great idea.

PG or not, with Bayless gone, who is creating their own shot off the bench?

Bingo!

 

[illmatic99]

I liked how Jerryd played in the playoffs last year (16 PER, 14pts, 4ast, 3reb) and still have a tiny glimmer of hope that he can be our PGoTF. Not ready to give up on him yet, especially given his work ethic.

 

[GriLtCheeZ]

as I learned over at SCUSA....

STFU NOOB!

 

[Wheels]

STFU NOOB!

lmao I was waiting for at least you to respond to my comment.

/ laughter.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

My first thought for a trade destination is a revisitation of the oft-discussed Bayless-for-Conley trade idea, simply because OJ Mayo has repeatedly stated that he wants to be a point guard, and I could see Mayo and Bayless working--either that or combusting spontaneously; either way it would be interesting.

I like this idea a lot, but I can't see Lionel Hollins approving. Our only hope is if OJ Mayo somehow has that bozo Heisley's ear and is working to get rid of Conley.

Also, Phoenix could be a potential partner, because they really have no SG's other than Jason Richardson, and since he (much like Frye) is an Arizona guy, he and the Suns' fans would be happy with that result.

Y'know, I suggested to some Phoenix fans (on the Phoenix version of Blazers' Edge) that they should trade us Dudley for Rudy (when I thought that Rudy was 100% certain gone) because I thought Rudy would work perfectly there and I too thought they had no young SGs. Boy, did I get pissy responses. Apparently not only is Dudley Lord God Almighty, but both Dragic and (get this) Josh Childress are officially SGs in the minds of Phoenix-dwellers. And I really can't see Bayless being their kind of guy, because he's a ball-stopper who needs the ball to be effective. Which brings us to...

However, I still can't shake the notion that we've never--never--seen what would happen with a Bayless-Roy pairing in the starting lineup. I understand that "Bayless isn't a point guard", but what he is is a talented player with a skill-set seemingly perfectly matched with Roy's, if only he could become a reliable outside threat.

I just don't see this. Blake was a player with a skill set perfectly matched with Roy's. He could hit spot up threes, he could bring the ball up and initiate the offense, he didn't care about shots, he didn't need the ball. Maybe that's a damning indictment of Roy, but I think it's true. (Actually I think we ideally need a Bigger Better Blake, which is what I always hoped Koponen was.) Bayless is almost the antithesis of that. He is (I repeat) a ball-stopper with tunnel vision. It would be like having TWO guys isolating at once. Our offense is already ugly enough, that would be the killer.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Bayless has his faults, but remember how terrible he was his rookie season compared to last year. The man is really improving. In a young guy, I look for a few things, and two of the most important are consistent improvement and drive. His FG went up from .365 to .414, his 3pt from .259 to .315, his FT from .806 to .831. His PER went up from 8.2 to 14.3, that's a huge fucking jump and a great sign.

You make a compelling case, but I am uncompelled. I think PER is very flawed, not least because it rates highly players like Zach Randolph and Corey Maggette who are selfish black holes. The 3% I will give you, but .315 is still pretty awful by today's standards.

And even if he is not optimal at PG (yet),

Ah, hope springs eternal. I continue to maintain that the class of good NBA points who weren't natural PGs when they came into the league consists of { Chauncey Billups, nobody else }.

who would you have back up Miller?

That is indeed the question. To be perfectly frank, I would already rather have Johnson. He's not a total unknown - I think Bayless's style of play is pretty much still the same as when he was scoring 30 ppg in his first Summer League (as a SHOOTING GUARD, next to my hero, Petteri Koponen), and Johnson was obviously a better PG in his stint in Summer League. And I still remember second round pick Alvin Williams (who, like Johnson and Eric Snow, was the PG on a college team with a more-heralded NBA prospect) starting well from day one.
But that's a risk. My ideal would be (surprise, surprise) either Marcelo Huertas or Pablo Prigioni. Or a healthy Koponen. But there's also the chance of getting a better PG (Mike Conley?) in return. I agree that Mills wouldn't cut it.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I like this idea a lot, but I can't see Lionel Hollins approving. Our only hope is if OJ Mayo somehow has that bozo Heisley's ear and is working to get rid of Conley.

My thoughts exactly. It seems like a move the coach would hate but the GM would do anyway just to appease their star.

Y'know, I suggested to some Phoenix fans (on the Phoenix version of Blazers' Edge) that they should trade us Dudley for Rudy (when I thought that Rudy was 100% certain gone) because I thought Rudy would work perfectly there and I too thought they had no young SGs. Boy, did I get pissy responses. Apparently not only is Dudley Lord God Almighty, but both Dragic and (get this) Josh Childress are officially SGs in the minds of Phoenix-dwellers. And I really can't see Bayless being their kind of guy, because he's a ball-stopper who needs the ball to be effective.

Yeah, I noticed that Childress is being listed as a SG--doesn't make sense to me. In any case, I was envisioning Bayless as kind of a poor-man's Barbosa in Phoenix; I see their games as relatively similar. If Barbosa worked in their system, Bayless should too. However, this again depends upon the GM's opinion of Bayless, not mine or Suns fans'.

I just don't see this. Blake was a player with a skill set perfectly matched with Roy's. He could hit spot up threes, he could bring the ball up and initiate the offense, he didn't care about shots, he didn't need the ball. Maybe that's a damning indictment of Roy, but I think it's true. (Actually I think we ideally need a Bigger Better Blake, which is what I always hoped Koponen was.) Bayless is almost the antithesis of that. He is (I repeat) a ball-stopper with tunnel vision. It would be like having TWO guys isolating at once. Our offense is already ugly enough, that would be the killer.

I think you mischaracterize Bayless here. He may not be Deron Williams, but he's more of a point guard than a Ben Gordon or an OJ Mayo. Look at his assist% last year--22.1%. Compare to the rest of the Blazers last year; Blake was almost the same (22.5%), Roy just a tad higher (23.1%), and Rudy "unselfish to a fault" Fernandez was significantly lower at 13.1%. Bayless is more of a distributor than you give him credit for.

And still, the point remains--we've never seen he and Roy try to coexist for an extended period of time. I'd like to see that before we give up on him.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

You don't trade a player just because you have "too many players".

Actually, you do. Some teams have a clear policy of keeping a small rotation of guys and it seems to make them blossom. Whereas in a situation where either one player is forever looking over his shoulder, or another player who thinks he is as good as the one getting the minutes, it can poison a lockerroom. The Spurs, the Jazz, the Nuggets and the Lakers all have a history of letting what have appeared to be talented young players just walk to maintain team chemistry. We always think of the Lakers as paper-thin at PG, yet they let a still-young, obviously talented Jordan Farmar (whom Lakers fans had been CLAMORING to get minutes over Derek Fisher) go because he wasn't right for their system. The Nuggets and the Jazz essentially have one gap in their starting five that they just plug with journeyman (SG in both cases) and do just fine. Sometimes less really is more, as Bob Whitsitt (bless his heart) never really learned.

Every team has guys who are going to ride the pine, and they aren't going to like it if they are any type of competitor at all. That's tough cookies.

Great psychological insight. Clearly you've been to leadership school.

You don't trade away a good player, to keep a bad one.

Well duh. Of course, I don't think I suggested that. But I also don't think Bayless partisans will ever appreciate what Rudy gets about basketball that Bayless doesn't.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I think you mischaracterize Bayless here. He may not be Deron Williams, but he's more of a point guard than a Ben Gordon or an OJ Mayo. Look at his assist% last year--22.1%. Compare to the rest of the Blazers last year; Blake was almost the same (22.5%), Roy just a tad higher (23.1%), and Rudy "unselfish to a fault" Fernandez was significantly lower at 13.1%. Bayless is more of a distributor than you give him credit for.

I would argue that those numbers are misleading. I'm not claiming that Rudy should be the PG (clearly he doesn't have the penetrating skills or handle) but he moves the ball and feeds the post very well. This isn't necessarily going to get him high assist numbers but is evidence of his willingness to play team ball. Meanwhile, a total ball-hog can get relatively high assists because the only time he gives up the ball is when the defense has collapsed on him and he dumps the ball to somebody who has to shoot. Just by being given the role of a PG you can get more assists than if (say) you're waiting in the post for a pass that never comes. I just know that I have watched a lot of Blazer basketball and I have never seen Bayless make a pass that surprised me and made me think he had PG instincts. But I have that with Rudy on many occasions. And conversely, I have often seen Bayless NOT make a pass that seemed obvious, especially to the player asking for the ball.

And still, the point remains--we've never seen he and Roy try to coexist for an extended period of time. I'd like to see that before we give up on him.

We HAVE seen him and Rudy try to coexist - and guess what? Bayless's numbers went way up and Rudy's way down. Hmm....

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I’d be open to trading Bayless if we could get a good player in return. Cleveland is an interesting team, if they eventually decide to rebuild maybe we could make a run at Mo Williams.

I have thought long and hard about Mo Williams (I have GOT to get a life) and I am torn. He's much less of a natural PG than Miller, but he is a better shooter, so might work very well next to Roy. He makes around $9M so could be had for Jerryd plus either Miller or Joel. But I wouldn't want to give up Miller. And if they took Joel just to dump salary, we would have Miller AND Williams, and that might be toxic. Ideally Williams would play alongside Roy, while Miller played alongside Rudy, but would there be minutes to keep people happy?

Here's a trade I suggested a while back: Bayless + Miller + Joel for Williams and Varejao. I am still intrigued, and I actually think Cleveland might consider it if only as a way to dump a couple of nasty contracts. But the downside is, we are left with NO truly natural PG.

 

[andalusian]

Yo be fair - JB's usage% is higher than Rudy's - so his AST% being higher is to be expected, but, on the other hand, he actually has a handle and the ability to go into the lane and absorb contact, which is the key in today's NBA to setting up people.

So, JB is a better play maker than people give him credit for - even if he never going to be a prime example of a classic PG, which, to be fair, is not an issue on this team with Roy in the back-court.

Rudy, on the other hand, is completely incapable to be a serious play-maker in the NBA - his handle is not good enough and his ability to go into the lane with the ball is very limited.

 

[Minstrel]

Yo be fair - JB's usage% is higher than Rudy's - so his AST% being higher is to be expected, but, on the other hand, he actually has a handle and the ability to go into the lane and absorb contact, which is the key in today's NBA to setting up people.

So, JB is a better play maker than people give him credit for - even if he never going to be a prime example of a classic PG, which, to be fair, is not an issue on this team with Roy in the back-court.

Rudy, on the other hand, is completely incapable to be a serious play-maker in the NBA - his handle is not good enough and his ability to go into the lane with the ball is very limited.

My thoughts exactly.

As for trading Bayless...I'd be open to it if the team could package him for a talent upgrade. I, however, likely rate his talent significantly higher than the OP, so my idea of what constitutes a talent upgrade is likely quite different.

Further, I'm not entirely sure what kind of player would represent a "better fit." I don't think a classic point guard is a better fit alongside Roy and, in any case, classic point guards are currently split into two classes as far as is relevant here: far too good to be acquired for Bayless and any other piece that isn't Roy/Oden or else not good enough to really be a talent upgrade.

I echo PtldPlatypus' desire to see Bayless and Roy play together for significant minutes before abandoning that as a potential "backcourt of the future."

 

[andalusian]

If Armon could develop his long-ball - he might actually be the best potential fit for this team as a perfect PG next to Roy - but until this is shown to really be the case - JB is the best option currently on the roster imho.

 

[illmatic99]

[video=youtube;5XVre9fSchA]

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Great game - and a reason to miss Bayless if he went. But not because he's a PG. I realize you must have picked that game because he had a great shooting night, but I saw ONE even mildly creative pass from Bayless (wraparound to Aldridge for the baseline jumper) which is about the same as what the currently unemployed Roger Mason (who also had a great game that night, if Mike Barrett was to be believed) managed (except Mason's was better and brought the Spurs to within 2 with under 30 seconds left). It was weird seeing Blake, and it was actually obvious how much more natural a PG he is than Bayless.

So, best use for Bayless: instant offense off the bench when all else fails. In other words, as a Brandon stand-in and NOT as a backcourt mate to Brandon. He can charge into the lane and draw fouls (if he doesn't dribble it off his foot first). But I would truly prefer a total team effort where the offense is less ugly.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I, however, likely rate his talent significantly higher than the OP, so my idea of what constitutes a talent upgrade is likely quite different.

That's OG.

I echo PtldPlatypus' desire to see Bayless and Roy play together for significant minutes before abandoning that as a potential "backcourt of the future."

518 minutes, #32 on the list..