Why we already have our our Franchise PG...

[glazeduck]

While it's certainly fun & intriguing to look at some of these rookie pgs as "our franchise guy" (big fan of Flynn & Ty Evans myself) I really, truly believe Jerryd Bayless is our guy, & think it's important for people to understand a few things about him...

-First & foremost, I think it's important to understand his psyche. He's not a passive guy, he's a firey competitor who's used to dominating people. He's that guy in pickup games who's used to being the best. When his game is on he's a great guy on & off the court, & it seems like every facet of his game is firing on all cyllanders. When he struggles, he's an asshole, & worse, he forces things to try to get his game going again, leading to bad mistakes, "blinders" (failing to see teammates or care about setting them up), more missed shots, essentially a downward spiral - we've seen this from Kobe before. THIS IS WHO JB IS.

So what does this first point mean? It means that Nate has to figure out ways to get him to contribute early. This works VERY well w/ Brandon, because Roy is a finisher and doesn't neccessarily like to start the game 'guns ablazin'.

-Secondly, by now no one should question Bayless's energy, toughness, defense, or ability to get to the basket. What's keeping him on the bench is his inability to do two things - knock down a jumpshot, and distribute. My second point has to do with the former, JB's shooting. As anyone who's watched him knows, Jerryd CAN shoot. By everyone's accounts, he's money in practice. Unfortunately his shot didn't fall for him this season.

A couple things on that... In watching him play early in the year/in preseason, he had a very funky release. Instead of snapping the wrist, coaches call it "waiving at the basket", JB seemed to be rolling his hand over the ball and almost shot-putting it to the rim. However, by the end of the season, Jerryd had nearly perfect form w/ a beautiful 'snap' & was drilling everything. It's my belief that our shooting coach was working that bad habit out of his game all season. Changing habits in sports is frustrating, takes time, and leads to inconsistency and a lack of trust in one's game. This, combined with learning a new position AND the pressure that he no doubt felt to succeed in his rare minutes probably were too much for a 19 year old rookie to handle.

I think this offseason is going to do wonders for his confidence, and we'll likely see a much better shooting JB next season. The NBA game moves at another speed than college & I think JB's learning curve will be similar to what we saw in Martell (who btw is looking VERY fit!). Everyone knew Tell would eventually be a knock-down shooter, but, if people recall, he couldn't have put the ball in the ocean as a rookie. They say you see the biggest jump in performance after one's rookie offseason, I think Bayless will be the poster boy for this point and will likely be our starting pg come next postseason.

-My 3rd point is how much his defense will help the whole team, but it relates to his "lack of distributing". Greg Oden's (whom I also expect to be much improved next season) biggest problem this year was foul trouble. A very large part of that foul trouble was Greg's innability to not foul PGs, and who can blame him? Have a 6'0 185 guy run into a brick wall like oden, flail in the air - it's a foul everytime. Really this is Blake's problem more than Greg's. Blake is an attrociously bad perimeter defender, and, last season let more people pass by him than a turnstyle. With JB on the court this won't be the case. I think w/ better perimeter defense, we'll see Greg average over 10 more minutes per game (providing, *knock on wood*, he stays healthy).

What does this have to do w/ JB's distribution you might ask? It's simple really. W/ Joel as essentially our main center last season, and with Blake's lack of ability to get by people, the we were forced to run WAY too many Iso post plays or pick and roles w/ Brandon and LA. The problem here is that these plays involve too many players standing around. W/ Greg in the game, we'll be able to get it down low to him. Even as unpolished as he is we saw late in this last season how much respect other coaches have for him by sending immediate doubleteams. We begin to see offensive options w/ GO in the ballgame. Drives, ball-movement, open shots all begin to come easier, and in this case, JB won't HAVE to be a great distributor, just a decent & willing one. Derek Fisher was average at best as a PG when the Lakers had Shaq yet they won rings.

Also on the GO staying out of foul trouble note... W/ JB in the ballgame, I think we'll start seeing more fouls against other centers because he has the ability to get to make his defender look like Blake, which will likely only improve EVERYONE (but esspecially Greg's) effectiveness in the paint.

So there it is. Laid out for you, take it or leave it. Apologies for the wordiness but I've been thinking about this for awhile. Rex, Jay-Bay, call him whatever you want, but I believe that soon we'll be calling him our franchis pg.

 

[adrenalize74]

While it's certainly fun & intriguing to look at some of these rookie pgs as "our franchise guy" (big fan of Flynn & Ty Evans myself) I really, truly believe Jerryd Bayless is our guy, & think it's important for people to understand a few things about him...

-First & foremost, I think it's important to understand his psyche. He's not a passive guy, he's a firey competitor who's used to dominating people. He's that guy in pickup games who's used to being the best. When his game is on he's a great guy on & off the court, & it seems like every facet of his game is firing on all cyllanders. When he struggles, he's an asshole, & worse, he forces things to try to get his game going again, leading to bad mistakes, "blinders" (failing to see teammates or care about setting them up), more missed shots, essentially a downward spiral - we've seen this from Kobe before. THIS IS WHO JB IS.

So what does this first point mean? It means that Nate has to figure out ways to get him to contribute early. This works VERY well w/ Brandon, because Roy is a finisher and doesn't neccessarily like to start the game 'guns ablazin'.

-Secondly, by now no one should question Bayless's energy, toughness, defense, or ability to get to the basket. What's keeping him on the bench is his inability to do two things - knock down a jumpshot, and distribute. My second point has to do with the former, JB's shooting. As anyone who's watched him knows, Jerryd CAN shoot. By everyone's accounts, he's money in practice. Unfortunately his shot didn't fall for him this season.

A couple things on that... In watching him play early in the year/in preseason, he had a very funky release. Instead of snapping the wrist, coaches call it "waiving at the basket", JB seemed to be rolling his hand over the ball and almost shot-putting it to the rim. However, by the end of the season, Jerryd had nearly perfect form w/ a beautiful 'snap' & was drilling everything. It's my belief that our shooting coach was working that bad habit out of his game all season. Changing habits in sports is frustrating, takes time, and leads to inconsistency and a lack of trust in one's game. This, combined with learning a new position AND the pressure that he no doubt felt to succeed in his rare minutes probably were too much for a 19 year old rookie to handle.

I think this offseason is going to do wonders for his confidence, and we'll likely see a much better shooting JB next season. The NBA game moves at another speed than college & I think JB's learning curve will be similar to what we saw in Martell (who btw is looking VERY fit!). Everyone knew Tell would eventually be a knock-down shooter, but, if people recall, he couldn't have put the ball in the ocean as a rookie. They say you see the biggest jump in performance after one's rookie offseason, I think Bayless will be the poster boy for this point and will likely be our starting pg come next postseason.

-My 3rd point is how much his defense will help the whole team, but it relates to his "lack of distributing". Greg Oden's (whom I also expect to be much improved next season) biggest problem this year was foul trouble. A very large part of that foul trouble was Greg's innability to not foul PGs, and who can blame him? Have a 6'0 185 guy run into a brick wall like oden, flail in the air - it's a foul everytime. Really this is Blake's problem more than Greg's. Blake is an attrociously bad perimeter defender, and, last season let more people pass by him than a turnstyle. With JB on the court this won't be the case. I think w/ better perimeter defense, we'll see Greg average over 10 more minutes per game (providing, *knock on wood*, he stays healthy).

What does this have to do w/ JB's distribution you might ask? It's simple really. W/ Joel as essentially our main center last season, and with Blake's lack of ability to get by people, the we were forced to run WAY too many Iso post plays or pick and roles w/ Brandon and LA. The problem here is that these plays involve too many players standing around. W/ Greg in the game, we'll be able to get it down low to him. Even as unpolished as he is we saw late in this last season how much respect other coaches have for him by sending immediate doubleteams. We begin to see offensive options w/ GO in the ballgame. Drives, ball-movement, open shots all begin to come easier, and in this case, JB won't HAVE to be a great distributor, just a decent & willing one. Derek Fisher was average at best as a PG when the Lakers had Shaq yet they won rings.

Also on the GO staying out of foul trouble note... W/ JB in the ballgame, I think we'll start seeing more fouls against other centers because he has the ability to get to make his defender look like Blake, which will likely only improve EVERYONE (but esspecially Greg's) effectiveness in the paint.

So there it is. Laid out for you, take it or leave it. Apologies for the wordiness but I've been thinking about this for awhile. Rex, Jay-Bay, call him whatever you want, but I believe that soon we'll be calling him our franchis pg.

Very good post, I agree with almost all of it.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

I also agree with most of it, and I really hope your right. I definitely think it can happen.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

I don't know. He's at his best when he's looking to score.

I think he could do very well off the bench in a Vinnie Johnson/Ben Gordon type of role.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I think Bayless is our guy as well.


I think they should bring in a vet like Kidd to help him understand the best way to attack another team, and maybe learn how to be a more complete player.

 

[LittleAlex]

I hope you are correct, since we are going to go into next year with Blake and Bayless at the point.

 

[Minstrel]

I don't know. He's at his best when he's looking to score.

So is Tony Parker. And Russell Westbrook. Neither are guys who orchestrate from the wings, they create for teammates by attacking the basket.

Scoring point guards who distribute off the attention they draw from the defense are becoming increasingly common.

 

[Wheels]

I think Bayless is our guy as well.


I think they should bring in a vet like Kidd to help him understand the best way to attack another team, and maybe learn how to be a more complete player.

this. I also think that Kidd will command less money, and minutes than an Andre Miller.. leaving more minutes for Bayless. while also leaving more money to shore up our other weaknesses.

 

[RickyRubio]

Good post. I agree as well.

 

[Boob-No-More]

this. I also think that Kidd will command less money, and minutes than an Andre Miller.. leaving more minutes for Bayless. while also leaving more money to shore up our other weaknesses.

I disagree on the "less money" money part. Mark Cuban seems committed to keeping Kidd around and isn't afraid to go over the luxury tax threshold to do so. The 76ers seem far less committed to keeping Andre Miller - and far tighter with their money.

Kidd has also said he wants to end his NBA career where it started - in Dallas.

I'd love to have Kidd, but I don't think there is any realistic way to get him.

BNM

 

[Nikolokolus]

Very nice analysis, repped.

 

[Wheels]

I disagree on the "less money" money part. Mark Cuban seems committed to keeping Kidd around and isn't afraid to go over the luxury tax threshold to do so. The 76ers seem far less committed to keeping Andre Miller - and far tighter with their money.

Kidd has also said he wants to end his NBA career where it started - in Dallas.

I'd love to have Kidd, but I don't think there is any realistic way to get him.

BNM

I have heard that as well. I thought I also remember him saying he would like to be somewhere where he can play less and mentor a guy. Plus the guy is competetive as hell.. and we offer that better than Dallas IMO. I do agree with you on money though, maybe I should re-word it to maybe close to same money, but less years.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Last October, when asked a question about if JB would even be a candidate for us to send to the DLeague, he replied "No way." KP's concern with Bayless isn't "with his Offensive position or Defensive skills, but wondering if he can learn to play with great players."

I don't know if he did or didn't this year. But it seems that that's a big part of the "distribution" side of things.

I'd like JB to be the guy, but I look at his (limited) body of work and don't see someone who'll get our players the ball in position to score efficiently and effectively. Hopefully I'm way off and this summer he turns into Bob Cousy.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Last October, when asked a question about if JB would even be a candidate for us to send to the DLeague, he replied "No way." KP's concern with Bayless isn't "with his Offensive position or Defensive skills, but wondering if he can learn to play with great players."

I don't know if he did or didn't this year. But it seems that that's a big part of the "distribution" side of things.

I'd like JB to be the guy, but I look at his (limited) body of work and don't see someone who'll get our players the ball in position to score efficiently and effectively. Hopefully I'm way off and this summer he turns into Bob Cousy.

He's never going to be that guy, he's probably got more potential to be a more defensive minded and aggressive Steve Francis (without the character issues) and for this team that's probably just about right.

 

[hasoos]

I don't know. He's at his best when he's looking to score.

I think he could do very well off the bench in a Vinnie Johnson/Ben Gordon type of role.

So when was the last time a pass first PG won the finals? How about the last time a pass first PG even went to the finals? (Kidd in NJ, many moons ago.)

Of course, it doesn't mean it won't happen, but since the NBA defensive rules changed on how guards can make contact out on the perimiter, it has forced the PG to be able to score more.

Secondly, if you have a weak spot on your team scoring wise, when you get into the deeper rounds of the playoffs, it turns into a liability when the opposition starts doubling off the guy they don't have to guard, because he isn't a threat. When you have more than 1, it is serious trouble, because then they can bring doubles from more than one direction on the floor.

 

[MAS RipCity]

Good post, great points, pretty much all what I have been harping on this whole season you summed up.
Bayless is our man for the future. Bring in Kidd to mentor him for 2 years and that position is closed for a while.

 

[Minstrel]

Two guys who can slash and pass make an offense deadly, even if neither is Bob Cousy. Bayless may never be a brilliant distributor, but he certainly seems to have the ability to pass competently. When the defense knows that both Bayless and Roy can collapse the defense and the opposing big men know that helping on a slasher means an easy score for Oden or Aldridge...the opposing defense is screwed.

Toss in that Bayless (based on his pre-2009 basketball career), Roy, Batum, Rudy and Outlaw (and Webster and Blake, if they're kept long-term) can all nail three-pointers if left open and the options for the offense become numerous if you have Bayless as a constant threat to collapse the defense.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Why has Allen Iverson never been a good PG? Why isn't Ben Gordon an all-star PG? Why will Monta Ellis never be a PG for Golden State? Either you've got it, or you're a too-short shooting guard. What has Bayless ever done to show that he has court vision and knows how to distribute the ball? Name me one guard other than POSSIBLY Chauncey Billups who has ever "learnt" how to play PG in the pros. FAR more common is the reverse: players thought to be PGs in college turn out not to cut it in the NBA. Even Steve Blake, who was the epitome of a playmaker in college (doesn't he have the Maryland career record for assists?) doesn't have what it takes to be a good distributor in the NBA (not fast enough/too cautious).

If you could somehow merge Sergio and Bayless, then you'd have the franchise PG. Bayless isn't it. He can't even play PG in Summer League. Or at least, he couldn't. Let's see if he can this year before we annoint him. My money says he can't.

He's that guy in pickup games who's used to being the best.

He's that guy in pickup games you HATE playing with, because he hogs the ball.

My 3rd point is how much his defense will help the whole team

Bayless is overrated as a defender. He's got that Sasha Vujacic "lots of on the ball activity to little effect" thing going on. He is hurt by those stumpy arms. He COULD be a good positional defender if he just tried to stay in front of his man, but he's shown no sign he understands team defense yet.

Bayless does one thing well: put his head down, charge to the hoop and draw fouls. He's (and I've said this before, but it's still true) a pint-sized Corey Magette. Can he be more? I have my doubts, but it sure would be nice.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

So when was the last time a pass first PG won the finals?

Um - LAST YEAR. Your short-term memory shot or something?

 

[Bwatcher]

I don't know whether Bayless is or is not the Blazer's "guy", but I suspect he will be given every chance this next year. Remember, they traded JJack in order to get Bayless. This is the JJack that had worked closely with Nate for a couple of years and who had been the starter for much of the season prior to the trade.

It seems clear that they hoped/planned on Bayless eventually being a starter level player, when they drafted him. Knowing the politics involved with the arrival of Rudy last season, I was not suprised to see Sergio given decent playing time during the year. However, I fully expect him to be elsewhere by fall, with Bayless being given extended backup minutes this next year. As I remember, JJack was limited in minutes his rookie year, but got big minutes his second year. I think this is a Nate pattern for rookies.

 

[MAS RipCity]

Why has Allen Iverson never been a good PG? Why isn't Ben Gordon an all-star PG? Why will Monta Ellis never be a PG for Golden State? Either you've got it, or you're a too-short shooting guard. What has Bayless ever done to show that he has court vision and knows how to distribute the ball? Name me one guard other than POSSIBLY Chauncey Billups who has ever "learnt" how to play PG in the pros. FAR more common is the reverse: players thought to be PGs in college turn out not to cut it in the NBA. Even Steve Blake, who was the epitome of a playmaker in college (doesn't he have the Maryland career record for assists?) doesn't have what it takes to be a good distributor in the NBA (not fast enough/too cautious).

If you could somehow merge Sergio and Bayless, then you'd have the franchise PG. Bayless isn't it. He can't even play PG in Summer League. Or at least, he couldn't. Let's see if he can this year before we annoint him. My money says he can't.



He's that guy in pickup games you HATE playing with, because he hogs the ball.



Bayless is overrated as a defender. He's got that Sasha Vujacic "lots of on the ball activity to little effect" thing going on. He is hurt by those stumpy arms. He COULD be a good positional defender if he just tried to stay in front of his man, but he's shown no sign he understands team defense yet.

Bayless does one thing well: put his head down, charge to the hoop and draw fouls. He's (and I've said this before, but it's still true) a pint-sized Corey Magette. Can he be more? I have my doubts, but it sure would be nice.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Two guys who can slash and pass make an offense deadly, even if neither is Bob Cousy. Bayless may never be a brilliant distributor, but he certainly seems to have the ability to pass competently. When the defense knows that both Bayless and Roy can collapse the defense and the opposing big men know that helping on a slasher means an easy score for Oden or Aldridge...the opposing defense is screwed.

Toss in that Bayless (based on his pre-2009 basketball career), Roy, Batum, Rudy and Outlaw (and Webster and Blake, if they're kept long-term) can all nail three-pointers if left open and the options for the offense become numerous if you have Bayless as a constant threat to collapse the defense.

If it was that simple, why does Orlando need an actual PG? Why not trade for someone like Eddie House? Why have either Skip-to-my-Lou or Anthony Johnson, each of whom has a shaky 3-pointer at best on the floor at all times? And Orlando has the nearest to a not-needing-a-PG-at-all offense in the NBA.

Boston has Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. Why do they insist on playing Rajon Rondo major minutes when he can't hit a jump shot? It's not because of poor coaching. You've got to have that PG. And he can't just be a short SG.

 

[hasoos]

Why has Allen Iverson never been a good PG? Why isn't Ben Gordon an all-star PG? Why will Monta Ellis never be a PG for Golden State? Either you've got it, or you're a too-short shooting guard. What has Bayless ever done to show that he has court vision and knows how to distribute the ball? Name me one guard other than POSSIBLY Chauncey Billups who has ever "learnt" how to play PG in the pros. FAR more common is the reverse: players thought to be PGs in college turn out not to cut it in the NBA. Even Steve Blake, who was the epitome of a playmaker in college (doesn't he have the Maryland career record for assists?) doesn't have what it takes to be a good distributor in the NBA (not fast enough/too cautious).

If you could somehow merge Sergio and Bayless, then you'd have the franchise PG. Bayless isn't it. He can't even play PG in Summer League. Or at least, he couldn't. Let's see if he can this year before we annoint him. My money says he can't.



He's that guy in pickup games you HATE playing with, because he hogs the ball.



Bayless is overrated as a defender. He's got that Sasha Vujacic "lots of on the ball activity to little effect" thing going on. He is hurt by those stumpy arms. He COULD be a good positional defender if he just tried to stay in front of his man, but he's shown no sign he understands team defense yet.

Bayless does one thing well: put his head down, charge to the hoop and draw fouls. He's (and I've said this before, but it's still true) a pint-sized Corey Magette. Can he be more? I have my doubts, but it sure would be nice.

Gary Payton took 4 years to really hit his stride, and some fans were imploring the team to trade him after his rookie season. Look at Rajon Rondo and the improvement he has made over his first couple of seasons. He really stunk when he came into the league, in fact he stunk so bad that Bassy challenged him for PT.

Now as for your questions about AI and Ben Gordon. Both of those guys are shooting guards, they have never been PG. In all of AI's best years he played SG next to Eric Snow. Ben Gordon has only played PG except in a pinch, as Heinrich, and now Rose handle those duties. As for Monta Ellis, I have no idea what you are talking about. He plays PG there all the time except when teamed with another point. In Don Nelsons system you are taught to get the ball up on the first shot available. If the PG has their hands on the ball when there is an opening, so be it. They are shooting.

Now as for the "ball hog" thing. All good PG are taught not to pick up their dribble unless absolutely necessary to avoid a turnover. In many ways, if they are keeping the ball moving and the posession alive, and keeping pressure on the defense by attacking the paint, they are doing their job. You may call it overdribbling. But as long as the ball is moving, most coaches don't mind it. The coaches want the ball to keep moving, and for the PG to not set themselves up for failure by picking the ball up. Jerryd already does that. What he doesn't do well right now is time the pass. That will either come with time, or it won't.

All I know is, that our PG that we have been running the show the last few years, only tend to do one thing well, and have no upside. None. Denada. Neicht. So I would rather take a chance on a guy who does, than sit back with guaranteed failure.

 

[Minstrel]

If it was that simple, why does Orlando need an actual PG? Why not trade for someone like Eddie House? Why have either Skip-to-my-Lou or Anthony Johnson, each of whom has a shaky 3-pointer at best on the floor at all times? And Orlando has the nearest to a not-needing-a-PG-at-all offense in the NBA.

Boston has Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. Why do they insist on playing Rajon Rondo major minutes when he can't hit a jump shot? It's not because of poor coaching. You've got to have that PG. And he can't just be a short SG.

These all seem like non-sequitors, they don't seem to relate to my post.

Regarding the Boston question, they play Rondo because he's their second-best player behind (a healthy) Kevin Garnett. Having more passing isn't a bad thing...why would they sit their second-best player?

Regarding Orlando, they don't need a pure point guard. I think Bayless, or a similar combo guard, would fit just fine at point guard for them. They didn't have a legitimate starter when Nelson went down, so they attempted to trade for one. I don't think it was a deficit of distributing ability that they were reacting to, but a deficit of talent. They needed a starting-caliber guard and felt Alston was the best one they could acquire without giving up major pieces of their team.

With Bayless and Roy in the backcourt, you have enough passing ability. It's not concentrated in one player, but I'm unconvinced that it needs to be. The championship Bulls and Lakers (of earlier this decade) never used a pure point guard, because they got enough passing from a variety of sources. With Bayless, Roy and Batum on the perimeter, the team will have sufficient passing. Similarly, a team doesn't necessarily have to have to dominant rebounder to be a great rebounding team, if enough players can rebound well. A distribution of a skill over a unit seems to be as effective as concentrating it in a single player. It's the team ability that matters, not where specifically an ability comes from.

 

[hasoos]

Um - LAST YEAR. Your short-term memory shot or something?

Dude are you fucking high? Rondo is not a pass first PG.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Cute clapping "emoticon" and hilarious LOLCatz picture

Cogently argued! I retreat to lick my wounds, convinced now that Bayless is our PG of the future.

How about a bet: if Bayless is at any time in the next two seasons the starting PG for the Portland TrailBlazers without the cause being suspension or injury to an actual starting PG, I will put "I'm a stupid Fuckwit" in my .sig. You don't need to do the same if he isn't - you've done enough already.

 

[glazeduck]

While i'm pleased w/ the response to my post, I have to say that my point in writing it wasn't really to start an argument over will he or won't he, but more a discussion regarding my observations on why I think he'll be a much improved player.

It's my personal opinion that he'll fit VERY well as our eventual starting trigger man, but regardless of WHERE he is on our depth chart, I think he'll be a much improved player.

That is all. Go Blazers!

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I can think of one team (one coach, really) where you don't need a stereotypical PG. The coach is... Tex Winter, and the system is the triangle. If the Blazers start running the triangle, then we don't need a normal PG. Of course, it would help to have Scottie Pippen.

With Bayless and Roy in the backcourt, you have enough passing ability. It's not concentrated in one player, but I'm unconvinced that it needs to be. The championship Bulls and Lakers (of earlier this decade) never used a pure point guard, because they got enough passing from a variety of sources.

...and there's the example. But (as Scottie Pippen said when he was on the Blazers) Pippen was a PG. You just can't smear the passing ability around - it's not like scoring or rebounding. Even teams that have good ball movement still have a PG.

Now, this is less true with bench squads. For stretches of the game you can make do, providing the other team isn't pressing. But if Bayless was a starter, effectively you would have made Brandon Roy the PG. And that's not good - he'd be the slowest PG in the league, and, while he has above-average court vision for a wing, he is poor by PG standards. We've all seen what happens when the ball is in Brandon's hands predominantly: it's the fourth quarter of close games. And it works for a while, but it's desperate (just like the LeBron strategy was desperation for Mike Brown in the Orlando series) and not a good use of the team.

I understand why everyone wants Bayless to be our PG of the future: he's big (for a PG), strong, and can score in bunches. But let it go - it's not going to happen. For Greg Oden's sake, if nobody else's!

 

[Wheels]

While i'm pleased w/ the response to my post, I have to say that my point in writing it wasn't really to start an argument over will he or won't he, but more a discussion regarding my observations on why I think he'll be a much improved player.

It's my personal opinion that he'll fit VERY well as our eventual starting trigger man, but regardless of WHERE he is on our depth chart, I think he'll be a much improved player.

That is all. Go Blazers!

lol I remember thinking the same thing when I first started here "damn.. every discussion ends up in an argument" you get used to it though. Welcome to the board

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Kirk Hinrich, Terry Porter, there are others. Passing the ball is not goddamn rocket science, there is no "it."

Terry Porter I'll give you. But then again, he was probably only playing forward for his team because he was the tallest guy they had in whatever tiny division Steven's Point is in. I bet he always handled the ball.

Kirk Hinrich. Couldn't you find a starting PG? Not only was he benched in favor of a rookie, the team actually contacted Jonny Flynn for a workout because they weren't even convinced that the guy who replaced Hinrich is a full-time PG! That makes Kirk Hinrich third string! I think you've proved my point.

There is nothing magical about playing point. All those other guys are not willing passers, AI thinks he's the best fucking option on the floor. Bayless is used to being the best option on the floor. He showed a willingness to pass, all he needs is reps and learning where his teammates like the ball.

Iverson can average assists in bunches. They put Jordan at the point once and he averaged a triple-double. Doesn't make him a good passer, just means he's a ballhog.

Bayless has tried to change, and when he does, he loses all he's good at. He's not an instinctive passer, he's an instinctive scorer. He could be a PG for a bad team, but he would be an average PG. He's a great bench scorer. That's what he is.