SB Nation User Blog: upper left corner

One man's perspective on sports and fandom, served with a side of Bayless.

upper left corner — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 22:52:22 -0000

Last night was pretty special for me. I was sitting on my couch with my wife, so sick from a cold that I forgot to change from the Newshour to the game. I came to my senses at the start of the second quarter.

You ask, what made the night so special? It wasn't the great victory over the mighty Kings. This was an overly close game against a lesser opponent. It wasn't even the fact that Nate came to his senses and started Miller and gave Bayless some run. Bayless has gotten minutes before. Bayless has scored before, in fact this was his third game with 14 points, so far this season. Bayless didn't really do anything he hasn't done all season.

What changed is that he got to do it with the game on the line. He was put in a pressure situation, and he responded with the same kind of performance we have seen all season: efficient scoring, 50% + shooting, an outstanding ability to get to the line and decent ball security. What made the night special for me was less what Bayless did on the floor and more the broad acceptance he received from fans, broadcasters, coaches and teammates.

Bayless is going to make a ton of mistakes, but I think it is pretty clear to the majority of folks that he is going to be a good player and potentially an outstanding player. There are of coarse, a few holdouts out there (AK are you listening?), but most are starting to catch on to what some of us have been saying ad naseum for over a year.

After the game, as I stared sniffling and sleepless at my ceiling, I got to thinking about my experience as a Blazer fan, in general, and as a Bayless Believer, in particular. Why do I care? Is it simply the narcissistic arrogance of wanting to be right? There is no doubt there is an element of that. We all like to win arguments; we all like to feel vindicated in our judgments. But I think there is more to it than that. Follow me across the jump to read my thoughts. Maybe a little sentimental or sappy, but it is the holiday season. I know it is long, but I hope you enjoy the journey and that it may help you to reflect on your own experience as a fan.

The Role of Sports in My Early Years

My family moved to Portland from Washington State in early October of 1969. We literally arrived on the scene the same week the Blazers came into existence. I was eleven years old and in the sixth grade. I went from being the most popular kid at my old school to being "the new kid" just as I was entering those fragile pre-teen years. My eighty one year old mother still tells the story of me coming home on several occasions and collapsing in a puddle of tears. Those first months were pretty darn lonely, two things got me through: participatory sports and obsessively following the Blazers on my portable radio and in the sports pages of the Oregonian.

The Blazers distracted me from my troubles. Participatory sports became my avenue to acceptance in my new school. I was a good student, but being a good student is often a social liability. I was also a good athlete, not a great one, but a good one. My Dad was a minor league pitcher and I still cherish the faded news clippings of his brief career with the Oakland Oaks ( the Korean War started and he had to enroll in college or be drafted) which state that he was, "the hardest throwing pitcher anyone has seen since Walter Johnson."

I can still recall the early day when my PE class chose sides for flag football, and the PE teacher asked me to kick a punt. I was a regional Punt, Pass, Kick champion. I caught a real good one, the ball went way over the head of the returner for the other team and sailed for nearly fifty-yards. All of the other kids just stood and stared at me, the boys had new found looks of respect and the girls showed a first glimmer of interest. And so it went, I made the Goldenball team that fall, and although I wasn't a starter, I at least got a little street cred for making the team. In the spring, I made the All-Star team in Little League, and I was pretty much on my way to fitting in. I'm sure that my experiences are far from unique. Sport and competition has played a huge role in the lives of millions of kids.

Watching sports played an important role in my relationship with my older brothers and my father. I watched my brothers compete on Friday night and then we all sat down and watched sports together on most weekends. My brothers were in college by the time we moved to Portland. The Blazers became an important part of my relationship with my Dad. We didn't have the money to attend games in the first few years, but by 1973, my dad was sharing a pair of season tickets with a couple of guys from work. My Mom loved the games, so I only got to go to a few each year, but those games were a very big deal to me.

In June of 1977, I was taking a year off between high school and college in order to work in the Oregon Legislature. It was an amazing opportunity for a young guy. The Legislature was meeting almost around the clock trying to finish its biennial session on the day the Blazers won the Championship. I can still recall the House of Representatives unanimously taking a recess so we could all watch the second half of the final game. The scene was utter pandemonium. Nearly two hundred Legislators, lobbyists, and staffers huddled around a single TV outside the House Chambers in the capital. Across the Capital, the Senate had taken a similar recess. The raucous cheers and loud moans echoed back and forth underneath the capital dome. It remains one of the most vivid memories of my life over thirty years later. I had to work the day of the Parade in Portland, but high-fiving Legislators, leaping around like school children, was plenty of celebration for me.

The Middle Years

For most of the past thirty two years, I have cheered the team from near and far. There was the year I lived in Peru and asked my Dad to mail me clipping even though it was expensive to send them Air Mail. There was the year when I lived in New York and could hardly get any info about the team on the day it actually happened. I can still recall the day I heard Buck Williams was coming to town and thinking "This is it, we are going to win another Championship." We came mighty close.

Through the ups and downs of school, business, marriage, and fatherhood, the Blazers have been a constant. I will readily confess that I did "boycott" the team for two years during the depths of the JB era, but it was always with the intention of coming back as soon as I felt I could get behind the team without being embarrassed.

Blazer Edge

I found BE about three years ago just as the team started to pull itself out of the muck. I lurked for most of a season, I felt I had nothing substantive to add to the conversation. But reading led to other b-ball sites and lead to more knowledge of the game.

My first real opinion about this new set of Blazers was that their defense, in general, and their perimeter defense, in particular, was desperately in need of improvement. By the spring of 2008, I got really hooked once again. Just as the Blazers were a pleasant distraction in my childhood, I have found them to be a pleasant distraction in the past two years of nearly catastrophic economic troubles I am a real estate investor and home renovator, the last two years have been extremely difficult. BE has been a place I come to for friendship, repartee, and solace. I have found that it has really deepened my understanding of the game and my experience as a fan.

My repeated plunges into the Polemical Point Guard Wars over the past two years has been a lot of fun. I have been a big supporter of Oden, Batum, and most of all, Bayless. Feeling as though I had the right basic evaluation of Bayless makes me feel like I have something to give back to this community

I believe all three guys have a chance to be outstanding, and if they live up to that potential, along with Roy and LMA, I believe there will be at least one or two parades in downtown Portland during the next decade. Potential is a tricky thing, as easily elusive as a broken patella. Let's hear it for our young warriors, may they mend, and grow, and reach the heights.

In the end however, let us remember that journey is far more fulfilling than the brief moment at the pinnacle. I want to thank Dave, and Ben, and all my fellow B Edgers, for enriching my fan experience.

From Benefit of the Doubt to Just Plain Doubt.

upper left corner — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:51:18 -0000

As a fan, I have consistently supported Nate. My position has been pretty simple, "Nate is getting good results, and he seems to have good rapport with the players, so who am I to complain." I'm just a fan, and I am sure Nate has forgotten more Xs and Os than I've ever known. Whatever complaints I might have about the rotation or the team's style of play were outweighed by the team's overall improvement. Whenever I felt the urge to grouse, I tried to restrain myself with the knowledge that Nate had earned "the benefit of the doubt."

Last night's game was excruciating, the type of game that inevitably provokes a chorus of complaints about the Coach. Generally, I hate the kind of bandwagon fans who start hurling accusations at players and coaches at the first whiff of trouble. I prefer a bit more patience and a bit longer view. In a long season, bad games happen. In general, my observation would be, "limit the damage and move on."

However, when I woke this morning, and started replaying in my mind the high definition ugliness I witnessed on my TV last night, I found that my usual restraints were missing. If this had just been one lousy game, I could dismiss it. But as I thought back over the past couple of months, I realized that my confidence in Nate has been steadily eroding.

I'm not at a point where I think Nate should be fired, but I am at a point where "benefit of the doubt" has turned into doubt. Follow me across the jump to my list of concerns:

1) Nate's handling of integrating Miller: I think Nate's approach has been troubling from the start. Andre Miller has had a very distinguished career in the NBA. Coming in he had a career PER of 18.0. His play has been just below All-Star level for the past half dozen years. By contrast, Steve Blake has been a player who has struggled to establish himself as a starter through-out his career. Blake's career PER of 12.0 tells the story; he is a solid journeyman somewhere between a quality back-up and a weak starter. His last season PER of 14.4 was better, but largely built on a career year from 3 pt range.

Nate's stated approach was to "let Blake and Miller battle it out in camp." In retrospect, this appears to have been a smoke screen. Miller outplayed Blake through-out the preseason, but Blake got more than 80% of the minutes with the starters. Nate tipped the playing field to favor Blake from the start. Given what Miller has accomplished in his career, it is no wonder that Miller perceived this approach as a lack of respect.

Despite Blake's poor play in preseason, and the turbulence created by his decision to start the lesser player, Nate stubbornly stuck to his decision. On one level, Nate's decision made sense. Blake is a proven fit with Brandon, and the second team seemed to be a group that would benefit from Miller's ability to play more up-tempo and his ability to penetrate and dish. However, the downside of Nate's decision was equally obvious: both Blake and Miller acted like guys who were stressing. Blake was constantly looking over his shoulder. He was trying to do too much with the ball and his turnover rate soared. His outside shot, normally the best part of his game, was noticeably off. Miller also showed signs of stress with higher turnovers and a lower shooting percentage than his career numbers would have suggested.

Nate stuck to his guns, and the team started the first five games with Blake at the helm. A lousy record of 2-3, forced Nate to try something different, and so, the three guard line-up was born.....

2) Nate's three guard line-up: How Nate arrived at the three guard line-up is a mystery. Perhaps he was unable to acknowledge that keeping Blake as the starter had been a mistake. Perhaps he felt pressured to appease Roy. Perhaps he was showing loyalty to Blake. Perhaps it was a response to Webster's inconsistent play. Perhaps he genuinely thought this was the best starting five to put on the floor. Whatever Nate's thought process, the results on the floor have clearly been mixed. On one hand, the team went on a six game win streak against mostly dreadful opponents before loosing two of the last three. On the other, the team struggled keeping teams out of the paint. The bigs tended to get in foul trouble. The team's rebounding dominance was reduced, and the team was forced to play more zone which exacerbated the problem.

Overall, I think it is probably too early to draw definitive conclusions about the three guard line-up. The team's defensive numbers are improved, but it is difficult to tell if this is just a mirage created by lousy opponents or a solid effect of the three guard line-up. Both Aldridge and Roy have seen reduced production. Miller's numbers have improved, but remain inconsistent, and well below his career averages. Oden seems to clearly benefit from Miller's presence on the floor, but continues to struggle with fouls. In the midst of all the ambiguity about the three guard line-up, one fact is indisputable: Steve Blake continues to struggle......

3) Nate's stubborn overuse of Steve Blake: Blake's season PER remains around 9.0. His turnovers are up. His assists are down. His True Shooting % is the third lowest on the team above only Howard and Trout. The reality is even worse than the stats. Steve is bricking totally open shots and passing them up with great frequency. Teams are almost daring him to shoot. They are doubling Brandon with abandon, and Steve is unable to make them pay.

Perhaps, Nate's three guard line-up makes sense given Webster's struggles (more on this below), but if so, it seems obvious that Nate is playing the wrong three guards. After some early season struggles, Rudy is shooting well. Why not sit Blake and play Rudy?

4) Nate's misuse or non-use of his young players: At the same time Nate has shown remarkable patience and trust in Blake, he has shown almost no trust in a trio of young players: Webster, Bayless, and Cunningham.

Webster: is a young player coming back from serious injury. Inconsistent play was to be expected. Rather than showing patience, Nate has jerked Webster around; Martell's role and minutes have been extremely inconsistent. This sort of inconsistency can only serve to undermine the confidence of a player who has had some issues with confidence throughout his early career. Fans have made repeated comments about how much Webster has struggled, but the fact remains his TS% is above Blake's and his defensive rating is 6 points better than Blake's. Webster clearly needs to settle down and the team needs him to shoot better, but a little bit of support from Nate might go a long ways in helping Webster relax and find his confidence.

Bayless: I think Nate deserves some credit for finding a good role for Bayless that allowed him to get some real success. Bayless and Rudy are a nice back-court combo with the second unit. They increase tempo, provide energy, score easy baskets, and get to the line. Bayless has shown dramatic improvement in his production. Bayless' PER has soared from last season's anemic 8.2 to an outstanding 19.8, that is right there with Oden and Roy at the top of the team (Cunningham has a higher score on a tiny number of minutes).

The disturbing part is that having found a way to use Bayless productively, Nate is now backing away from what worked. Bayless has had a total of 10 minutes in the last three games. Again, Nate is not living up to his professed policy of players "earning" minutes. Bayless has played well and Nate is demonstrating that he does not trust him and will not reward his success.

Cunningham: Trout is hurt, that is certainly not Nate's fault. But Juwan is clearly running on fumes. Why not give Cunningham a few minutes? He had a good summer league and has been productive in his tiny number of garbage minutes. Bayless and Cunningham have shown some flashes of chemistry. We should take advantage of this opportunity to try to develop a promising young player.

5) Nate's stagnant offensive schemes: Nate repeatedly professes to want to increase tempo to take advantage of the teams athleticism, but his coaching decisions undermine this very goal. Blake seems almost constitutionally incapable of running the break. Time after time he pulls up and allows the opposition to get their defense set. Nate continues to rely on isolation plays and pick and pop schemes even when it is clear that opposing teams know what is coming and have developed schemes to take the ball out of Roy's hands. To my untrained eye, there appears to be little motion, few cutters, and a limited plays to take advantage of Miller's skills. We frequently start the game trying to go into the post and just as frequently abandon those efforts as the game unfolds.

The overall impression is of a team that does not know what it wants to do. They appear dominant for stretched and then quickly go away from the very style of play that has shown success. They lack a consistent identity and are unable to impose their style of play on the opposition for extended periods of time. It isn't pretty, and it isn't consistently successful.

Conclusion

I certainly hope that my doubts prove to be ill founded. I went in to the pre-season expecting the team to win somewhere in the high 50s. Injuries have had a real impact, and that is not Nate's fault, but it is Nate's responsibility to help the team find a response. It is Nate's responsibility to help the team establish a clear identity and develop a clear understanding of how to win. Right now I see confusion and uncertainty. Am I just being a typical fan, with artificially inflated expectations, engaging in the customary hand wringing after a bad loss, or are there real reasons for concern?

Poll

Am I just being a worry-wort, or is there real reason for doubt?

Buck up buddy, I am sure Nate will get us to the promised land.

9 votes

A little doubt is reasonable, but I'm still betting on Nate

54 votes

Doubt is a reasonable response to what we are seeing on the floor.

195 votes

Doubt? I'm past doubt and ready for tar and feathers.

45 votes

303 votes | Poll has closed

UPDATED: Can somebody please explain to me why Blake is getting so many minutes?

upper left corner — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:27:16 -0000

UPDATE: I think this thread has generated a fair amount of thoughtful discussion in it's first 150 comments. I would like to add a couple of thoughts and clarifications about my OP:

1) Several people have criticized my OP as being disrespectful of Steve, and looking back, I think their criticisms have some merit. My tone was a bit snarky in places. Steve deserves better; he has been an integral part of the teams dramatic improvement over the past two plus seasons. He is a good guy and a solid player. As my OP points out, his production has declined significantly (from 14.4 last season to 9.1, so far, this season), and I think that is a topic for legitimate conversation.

2) Several thoughtful defenders of Blake have suggested that Blake is making the team better in some intangible way that is not showing up in his individual stats that are the primary focus of my OP. This seems possible. Blake's non-adjusted +/- stats are the best on the team. Non-adjusted +/- is a notoriously fickle stat because there are so many uncontrolled variables that can have a huge impact on these numbers. Generally it is considered unreliable unless the sample size is very large, but it is a possible explanation.

3) In general, I think we should all keep an open mind on this subject. Those of us who have doubts about the three guard line-up should wait and see what unfolds on the court. Maybe the defensive concerns we have are overblown. We will know more when the team plays a few games against better quality opponents. Maybe Nate sees this is a transitional line-up. On the other hand, Blake's defenders need to keep an open mind as well. His production has taken the biggest decline of anyone on the team, if this trend continues, his role may need to be adjusted. You can give him credit for past service, and you can give him credit for team success, but at some point, he has to bring it on the floor. You can't keep a guy with a PER below ten in the starting line-up indefinitely when you have three guys who are more productive sitting on the bench.

4) Trout's injury occurred a few hours after my OP. Obviously, his absence is going to effect the rotation. Let's see how Nate handles this challenge and let's see how the team responds on the floor.

BOTTOM LINE: I think these developments all bear watching. Maybe the team will keep winning maybe not. Maybe Blake's play will improve, maybe not. Let's keep our eyes on the scoreboard and the stats for a few more games and then revisit this topic when things become a bit clearer. Again, thanks for the quality discussion.

Is it Blake's efficient scoring? Well no, his PER is at 9.6, which is absolutely atrocious, worse than any player on the team besides Howard. The other candidates for minutes: Bayless 20.6; Martell 15.0; Rudy 14.9; Miller 13.3

Is it that Blake's outside shooting is desperately needed? Well no, Blake is shooting at a 40% clip from three, but so is Rudy, so is Travis, and Martell isn't far behind. Even Bayless has shown an improved outside shot making over 40% of his jumpers and his lone attempt from 3..

Is it Blake's lock-down defense? OK, I am being a bit snarky. No one is likely to label Blake a good defender. Some might argue that he is the best we have at the point. Blake's Defensive Rating of 102 is a single point better than Miller's and 3 points better than Bayless' , but whatever edge he has over Miller and Bayless is, at best, slight. In particular, Blake tends to struggle against quick guys who penetrate.

Perhaps it is Blake's solid distribution skills? Well surprisingly enough, Blake is the fourth best assist man on the team so far this season. <strong>Assists Per 36 Minutes</strong>: Miller 6.0; Roy 5.2; Bayless 5.0; Blake 4.2; Rudy 3.2. Yes, you read that right, Bayless has more assists per minute than Blake.

Maybe it is Blake's ability to snag a few rebounds? Well, no. Blake is the worst rebounder of any of our perimeter players: <strong>Rebounds Per 36 Minutes:</strong> Bayless 4.3; Roy 4.3; Miller 4.1; Webster 4.0; Rudy 3.9; Blake 3.2.

Certainly, it must be because Blake makes so few mistakes? Well um, er, no. Blake has a higher Turnover Percentage than either Miller or Bayless: Bayless 14.2; Miller 16.0; Blake 16.2

I realize I am being a bit provocative. Blake is a solid player and he has played a significant role in the teams success over the past two seasons. However, Nate is the one who said that the players would determine who got minutes by their play on the floor. Judged by the very preliminary stats I have just presented, I think it is clear that Blake has not earned the minutes he has received.

To me, it is clear that those minutes should be split between Rudy, Webster, and Bayless. All three have been more efficient and effective than Blake. If Nate wants to stick with a three guard line-up, Rudy seems like the obvious choice alongside Miller and Roy. He can help spread the floor like Blake, but he is a more dynamic scorer, and he has better size to defend the two. If Nate wants to return Roy to his natural position and give the team stronger defense at the three, Webster is the obvious choice.

Bayless has been the team's most improved player, so far in his limited minutes. His PER and TS% have both jumped dramatically to 20.6 and .664 respectively. Furthermore, the stats suggest that while he is still a work in progress, his distribution skills are improving. His Assist Rate per 36 minutes is up to 5.0 and his Turnover Rate, while still having room for improvement, has actually been the best of the three PGs. Bayless has been the teams most efficient and effective scorer off the bench. To me, this is a case of, "if it is working, don't mess with it." Bayless has earned the back-up PG minutes even if Nate abandons the three guard line-up.

Nate should stick by his own motto that "minutes are earned." By that standard Blake's minutes should be significantly reduced.

All stats are taken from Basketball Reference.Com http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2010.html

Guess who has the highest PER for the Blazers? Hint, it isn't who you think.

upper left corner — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 13:36:36 -0000

I know you are probably thinking Brandon Roy, with a current PER of 21.06. You would be wrong. The highest PER on the team through last nights game with a PER of 27.52: Jerryd Bayless.

Yes, you read that correctly, Jerryd Bayless, who struggled last season with a PER of just over 8, has a current PER of 27.52. Obviously, this stat doesn't mean too much when he has only played 23 minutes in two games. It does however, suggest that folks should take a look at their assumptions about Bayless. We have heard it endlessly from Bayless' detractors, "He will never be a Point Guard. He is nothing more than an undersized Shooting Guard, who can't shoot."

Follow me across the break to discuss what Bayless is doing, and what it might mean for the team.

Bayless' taste of success:

I, and a host of other folks, have been arguing that Bayless has real potential. Bayless is a born scorer, with an excellent chance to become an outstanding combo guard and perhaps even more. His ability to get to the rim and draw fouls, gives him an opportunity to become an extremely efficient scorer. At the moment, his True Shooting % is an outstanding .679, which puts him ahead of every PG in the league not named Chris Paul. All last season, and all summer long, I argued that the moment Bayless got his new shooting stroke figured out well enough to perform in games, he would be a load to defend. If you play up on him he will blow by you, if you sag off he will shoot over the top. Obviously, it is too early to make any sort of definitive statements, but based on what we saw in pre-season and what we saw in Bayless first two regular season appearances, it seems clear that his shot is much better.

Perhaps even more important, Bayless' decision making shows signs of improving. Last season you could almost watch the gears turning in his head. His attempts to be a PG messed with his ability to score. He often hesitated and the offense frequently bogged down. Last season, Bayless seemed to have two modes: "distribution mode" where he tried to get assists, and "scoring mode" where he put down his head and took off for the basket. This season, early indications are that Bayless is more comfortable on the floor. He is starting to take what the defense gives him. When help comes on his drive to the basket, he is trying to find the open man. When he is open on the perimeter, he seems to have the confidence to take the jumper.

Much of the credit for Bayless' taste of success should go to Rudy. Rudy and Bayless are sharing playmaking responsibilities when Bayless is in the floor. To my eye, Rudy and Bayless are an excellent combination. Bayless isn't a proficient enough distributor to effectively run the team by himself, but he is more than just a "SG in a PG's body." Bayless is starting to learn to use his ability to penetrate to set up teammates, in some of the same ways Roy does. Bayless has 5 assists in 23 minutes of PT. Certainly, that doesn't mean that he has "arrived" as a point guard. Bayless is a work in progress, but I think we can see the potential. Rudy's passing ability helps keep the second unit from becoming stagnant and one-dimensional. When Rudy finds his range on his outside shot, they are going to be incredibly difficult to defend.

Opinions vary greatly regarding Bayless' defense. Two things seem indisputable, Bayless is better equipped to stay in front of opposing PGs than either Blake or Miller. Bayless has better speed than either Miller or Blake, and more strength than Blake. Some like Bayless' aggression on defense and like the fact that he is able to put some pressure on the ball. Others point to his foul rate and say he is overly aggressive and that this leads to cheap fouls and getting burned by penetration. I think both sides are right. Bayless does get called for a lot of ticky-tack fouls. Part of it is just like Oden, being a young guy who has not yet established himself in the league and who does not get the benefit of the doubt on many whistles. Part of it is just a need for experience on the floor. Bayless will learn what he can get away with, and what he can't, with more time. I don't think it is disputable that perimeter defense, in general, and PG defense, in particular, is a major area of concern for the team. Many of us have been harping on this for several seasons. To me, Bayless has the tools and the commitment to become a good defender, and the sooner the better. If Bayless can at least slow down some of the uber-quick PGs we are likely to meet in the playoffs, that would be a huge benefit to the team.

What, if anything, does this mean for the team?

Again, obviously it is way too early to draw any conclusions about Bayless' play. Twenty three minutes of PT, with eighteen coming against what is probably the worst team in the league, can easily be "overvalued." On the other hand, I don't think what Bayless has shown should be dismissed. So far, Bayless is our most efficient scoring option off the bench: better than Rudy, Trout, or Webster. 18 points in 23 minutes with a TS% of .679 is nothing to sneeze at. At a minimum, it screams for additional playing time to see if Bayless can sustain anywhere near this rate of production.

So where do you find minutes for Bayless, given that the Blazer's roster is more stacked than Dolly Parton? To me, the answer is pretty obvious. Bayless needs to remain paired with Rudy in the second unit. I have serious doubts about the current three guard starting line-up. I hope this is merely a transitional phase to help blend Roy and Miller. I don't see that Blake brings much to the table that can't be provided by Webster. Webster is shooting 38% from distance. Webster provides better rebounding, better defense, and ultimately I think Webster's ability to run the floor will be a great match with Miller and LMA in the starting five. I also think Roy should probably play at his natural position. In Nate's offense, the SF tends to stand in the corner, I don't want our best player marginalized.

The Blake Factor?

So if Webster eventually returns to the starting line-up (or Nic, down the road), what do you do with Blake? Nate's obvious reflex will be to move Blake to the second unit and move Bayless back to the bench. I think this would be a huge mistake. Blake is a bad fit with the second unit. He is lousy at pushing tempo, and his outside shooting is redundant next to Rudy (or Martell). Rudy will benefit from having a penetrating PG who can kick the ball back out to him for open threes. Trout will also benefit from playing next to a penetrating PG. To me, Bayless is a much better fit with the second unit than Blake.

Furthermore, it makes a lot more sense to play Bayless for the long run. The Blazers know that Blake is not likely to be the starting PG on a championship caliber team. The fact that they brought in Miller is a tacit admission of this fact. Miller will likely be done in 2-3 years. Will Blake, at 32 or 33, be the guy to take the reigns back? Obviously not.

If you acknowledge that Miller is a better PG, and a look at career stats and the last two games should make it extremely obvious, Blake is ultimately nothing more than a back-up PG, who is in the way of any potential long-term answer at PG. Even if you hate Bayless, or just think he will never be a PG, Blake is in the way of the development of any young PG the Blazers might draft or trade for.

As everyone knows, Blake's contract expires at the end of the season. The team has three alternatives:

1) Let Blake walk at the end of the season. This alternative allows the team to retain Blake's steady hand and outside shooting for the playoffs, but means we get nothing of value for a guy who is a solid, back-up quality, veteran player.

2) Extend Blake's contract. Does it make sense to keep Blake as the back-up beyond this season? If you do, you are either going to bury him on the bench as the 3rd string PG, or he is going to continue to block Bayless' development. If Blake is willing to sign for cheap, he would be a nice guy to keep on the roster, but if he wants anything like market value, he would be a very expensive, luxury tax inducing contract. Particularly given that the Blazers decided to keep Patty Mills, extending Blake doesn't make much sense to me.

3) Trade Blake's expiring contract. Trading Blake at the deadline makes a lot of sense, if Bayless continues to perform in the second unit next to Rudy. Bayless is likely to be a better defender and a better scorer by then. By the trade deadline, Patty Mills should be back in action as an emergency back-up and the team may have a better idea of his potential. Blake's contract could be combined with Trout's to bring in another quality big man, or could be traded by itself for a player or draft pick.

Conclusion

I think Bayless has shown enough to warrant more time on the court. He and Rudy show promise as a backcourt tandem who can compensate for each others weaknesses. If Bayless continues to produce at anywhere near his current rate, I think Bayless is the smart choice for the teams back-up PG minutes. If Bayless establishes himself by the trade deadline, KP should seriously consider trading Blake. Steve is a great guy, and a solid player, but his skills are too limited for him to be the starter, are a poor fit with the second team, and he is in the way of developing an answer to the teams long term need at PG.

Bayless is still a question mark. Is he just a scorer off the bench? Is he a useful combo guard who can score efficiently, defend aggressively, and distribute adequately? Or is he our "PG of the future," the guy who can ultimately slip into the starting line-up next to Brandon Roy? I don't know the answer, but I think Bayless has shown enough that the team needs to find out.

Conventional Wisdom Be Damned, Blazer's Window Is Open.... NOW!

upper left corner — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 21:11:54 -0000

Note: After posting this Sunday afternoon, I couldn't sleep Sunday night, so I decided to expand on some of my thoughts about expected improvements. I added a 3A and a 3B, as well as 4A. Thanks.

Conventional wisdom in sports is often more about trying to avoid the embarrassment of being wrong, rather than taking the risk of being right. What I mean is that most sports writers and commentators are inclined to look to the past to predict the future.

This tendency is very much on display in numerous articles making predictions about the upcoming NBA season (for example, read the ESPN series which polled nearly 50 "experts."). LA and SA have each won four titles in the past ten years. So the vast majority of analysts are ready to pick one of these two to come out of the WC next year. In the East, Boston won two years ago, Cleveland had the best record last year, and Orlando made it to the finals, so each has their advocates. Certainly, this point of view makes a lot of sense. These are five good teams with proven talent and a record of accomplishment in the playoffs. It makes sense to pick these guys as the odds-on-favorites to do it again. However, in the real world last years winners are not always next year's best teams. How many expected the Magic to win the East? Almost no one. Who predicted that Denver would make the WC Finals? Almost no one. Sportswriters rarely have the courage or insight to predict that a team will win until it already has.

This brings us to our beloved Blazers. The conventional wisdom is that they will be good, but that they will not win in the Playoffs until..... well until, they win in the Playoffs. Need I point out that this sort of reasoning is rather circular? ESPN's panel of experts predicted the Blazers to finish third behind LA and SA in the regular season. But not one person predicted that the Blazers would win the WC. By contrast, one pundit each picked Dallas and Denver to win the West.

Marc Stein, who publishes the ESPN Power Rankings, was even less generous. He ranked the Blazers ninth in the league, behind the big three from the east, and behind not only LA and SA, but also behind Denver and Dallas in the west.

To me, this kind of thinking is both short sighted and cowardly. I think the Blazer's championship window is open, now. That doesn't mean that I think they will win this year. It does mean that I think they have a reasonable, if small, chance. It does mean that I think the Blazers will be among the league's elite this year and in the mix come next spring. I see LA and Cleveland as the favorites, but I think the Blazers have as much chance as the second tier of Boston, San Antonio, and Orlando. Make the jump to read my reasons why:

1) Many analysts are failing to appreciate just how good the Blazer's where last season.

Hollinger's Power Rankings, which are based on stats rather than subjective criteria, had the Blazer's third at the end of last season. A lot of pundits seem to feel that the Blazer's "overachieved" last year and they speculate that the team may have trouble living up to last year's 54 wins. The data suggest otherwise, the Blazer's point margin actually suggested that the Blazer's could have been expected to have an even better record. As has been frequently noted, the Blazers had the most efficient offense in the league and ranked at or near the top in rebounding percentage. These kinds of stats are rarely fluky and tend to be very predictive of future success.

2) Season stats from last year tend to mask the Blazer's improvement over the coarse of the season.

The Blazers of November were not the same team that finished the season 19-6 in March and April. Portland was right there with Cleveland and LA in terms of dominance over the last month of the season. This reality tends to be overshadowed by the Blazers elimination by the Rockets. But the Rockets were a particularly bad match-up for the Blazers and should be given real credit for taking the Lakers to seven games without Yao.

I think it is reasonable to expect that the Blazers of this season will look more like the team from April rather than the team from November. Portland's improvement was particularly noticeable on the defensive end. The Blazers ranked 18th in defensive efficiency at the All-Star break and had improved to 11th by the end of the season. In order to move up that much, that quickly, they must have been near the top five over the last couple of months. Oden's return from injury was a big part of the team's improvement. I expect the Blazers to open this season defensively near where they finished it last season. If they do, there is little doubt that they will be among the league's elite teams from opening night on.

3) The Blazers have a lot of players who can be reasonably expected to improve

Jscot did an outstanding job of laying out the case for rational exuberance in his "Da BOM" post. I won't waste your time, or mine, by repeating it. Suffice it to say, there is every reason to expect that a number of the Blazers young players are likely to be better this year than last. We don't need miraculous improvements to move ahead, just the natural maturation that can be expected of most young players. Furthermore, the team has so much depth, that we don't need improvement from every player to be significantly better overall. We just need some of our young guys to take the next step:

3A) As many have noted, Oden is key to the Blazers improvement

A lot of the speculation about Oden tends to be binary: is he a bust, or isn't he? Will he stay out of foul trouble, or won't he? Will he he get his quickness back, or won't he? On one hand, these all seem like reasonable questions. On the other hand, they miss the mark. Oden is likely to improve marginally in several areas; the real question is to what extent will these marginal improvements add up to a significant improvement in his overall effectiveness?

I see the Oden Equation as something like this: 5% reduction in body weight + 5% improvement in vertical leap + 5% improvement in lateral quickness + 10% improvement in conditioning + 20% improvement in confidence + unknown improvement in offensive technique = a much more effective GO

We won't know the final value of the equation until we actually see it on the floor, but I think there is every reason to be optimistic.

3B) SF: Webster/Batum

We will never really know how much Webster's injury affected the Blazer's performance last year. I had high hopes for Martell last season, and felt he was ready for a break-out season. Reports from pre-camp practices give me hope that the break-out may still be coming. On the other hand, Batum far exceeded expectations and demonstrated that he has all the tools to be an effective defensive specialist. Nic's offensive potential remains an open question. He shows lots of potential, but has not yet shown consistent production on the floor. Despite Batum's promise, the Blazers paid a real price for playing him last season. He was frequently a non-factor on offense, and his presence on the floor with Pryz and Blake left the Blazers with only 2 1/2 scorers on the floor (Roy, LMA, + Blake from outside). As Houston demonstrated in the playoffs you can make a team with only 2 1/2 scorers really struggle.

With the return of Webster, the arrival of Miller, and the emergence of Oden, the Blazers have the ability to put five effective scorers on the floor at the same time. If those five are working effectively together, they are going to be extremely difficult to stop.

Hopefully, Nate will now have the luxury of choosing between a defensive SF Batum, who can score, or an offensive SF Webster, who can defend. If we need to cool off an opposing player, send in Batum. If we need additional scoring, send in Webster. Over time, one of the two will establish themselves as the more effective player.

4) A lot of folks don't seem to realize just how good Andre Miller is, nor what a difference he is likely to make.

Miller isn't Billups. Billups is a couple of years younger, is a bit better defender, and has a significantly better outside shot,; however, they do have a lot of similarities. Both are very crafty veterans with very high BBIQ. Both are extremely poised and play within themselves with a firm grasp of their own limitations. Both are outstanding floor generals who know how and where to get the ball to teammates.

I know that a lot of folks are rightfully appreciative of the role that Blake played in the Blazer's success last season, however, make no mistake about it, Miller is a very substantial upgrade. Miller ranked 12th among all PGs in terms of PER at 18.71. 12th makes it sound like he is "pretty good, but not great." If you look a little closer, you will like what you see. Miller is within a single point of ranking 6th, while more than a point above Sessions who is ranked 13th. Furthermore, other metrics suggest that Miller is even more valuable. In terms of "Value Added" Miller ranks 5th, only behind All-Stars CP3, Parker, DWill, and DHarris. Miller also ranks 5th in "Estimated Wins Added" behind the same four All-Stars. Miller is actually above Billups, Nash, and Rondo in both these metrics.

Yes, Miller is definitely getting old, but his production shows no sign of decline. His PER and TS% have both improved each of the past two seasons. Even his 3pt percentage (on a very limited number of attempts) has improved somewhat. Many have questioned whether Miller is going to be a good fit next to Roy because of his limited abilities as an outside shooter. This is definitely a legitimate question. We won't know until we see them in action, but I think looking at Miller's experience next to Iguodala, should be reassuring to all of us. Iggy is even more of an off the dribble player than Roy, and yet he and Miller both prospered together in Philly. I think it is reasonable to expect a few bumps as Miller and the team get to know each other, but there is little doubt in my mind that Miller makes Portland much better for the next year or two.

4A) Backup PG

Not only is Miller a very significant upgrade over Blake, Blake is a significant upgrade over Sergio and Bayless 1.0 at backup PG. Just as Oden's arrival had a huge impact by solidifying our center rotation and reducing the number of minutes we were reliant on LMA or Frye playing center, Miller and Blake solidifies our PG rotation.

Furthermore, I am probably in the minority on this point, but I think there is a real chance that Bayless may yet earn some minutes this season. Bayless struggled in three areas last year shooting, team defense, and effective distribution of the ball on offense. Having said that, because Bayless was so effective getting to the rim and the free-throw line he still scored at an effective rate per possession. If Bayless can find his shot, and the Blazer shooting coach singled him out for praise, he can be a very effective offensive option. The bigger question is whether or not he can improve his defense. It seems to me that this is Bayless' real opening. PG defense is likely to remain a real weakness. Neither Miller or Blake have the speed to stay with the league's uber-quick PGs. If Bayless can demonstrate to Nate that he can become our best PG defender, he may earn some minutes. Regardless of whether it is Blake or Bayless 2.0, the back-up PG situation is likely to be dramatically improved.

5) The key to the Blazers success in the playoffs is home court advantage

I expect the Blazers to approach or exceed 60 wins. I realize that many are less optimistic for various reasons. I have to take this opportunity to give our Fearless Leader, Dave, a bit of a hard time. If my memory still serves, last year Dave, who is always concerned about inflated expectations, predicted 46 wins. The team blew that cautious prediction away. I understand that 60 is a challenge, but barring major injuries to one of the big three (or now big 4) I think it is very realistic to think the Blazers can achieve that level of success.

I fully expect the Blazers to win their Division, and I think it is even conceivable they could challenge the Lakers for best record in the Western conference. The Lakers have more older players and less overall depth. One injury to one of their top rotation players, and the door may be open for the Blazers. If the stars align correctly, the Lakers could be coming to the Rose Garden for the WC Finals. Wouldn't that be something?

Again, I am not saying that the Blazers are favorites to win it all. Their lack of playoff experience clearly makes them underdogs, but they are underdogs with a lot of bite. At this point, I think the Lakers and the Blazers are arguably the two most talented teams in the Western Conference. By the time the playoffs roll around, SA will have 7 players over the age of 30. If they all stay healthy, they may be in the discussion, but that is a very big if. Denver had a magical season and lost a couple of key reserves. Dallas also has a lot of older players and still lacks a decent center. NO just doesn't have enough quality players to complement CP3.

Anything may be possible, but I think the smart money is on LA and Portland in the WC Finals. LA's huge advantage in experience would make them a significant favorite, but I think in terms of talent, the Blazers are the only team in the conference who could give them a real run for their money.

Conventional wisdom may argue that the Blazers are at least a year away, but I think there are plenty of reasons the Blazers deserve to, at least, be in the discussion. If I am prophetic, remember, you read it here on the eve of training camp.

The "Bayless hate" on this site, and on "95.5 the Game," is totally out of control

upper left corner — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 14:23:58 -0000

Bayless' critics seemed to be emboldened by SL and by the Miller signing. The number of dismissive and even ridiculing comments has just spiraled out of control. Are these comments justified? Was Bayless' performance in SL so bad? Is the Miller signing an indication that Bayless is on his way out of town? My answer to all of these questions is a resounding "NO." I acknowledge that there are very real questions about Bayless' future and legitimate concerns about his game, but we seem to have a collective case of jumping to conclusions based on very little information. Let's discuss this after the jump.

Three weeks ago before SL, while there was considerable disagreement about Bayless, there did seem to be a majority view which saw Bayless as a top young prospect with outstanding physical skills, a gift for scoring, a tremendous work ethic, and an uncertain ability to develop into an adequate distributor. I would argue that nothing has happened in the past three weeks that should have changed any one's opinion about Bayless.

Summer League's Great Expectations

Bayless' performance in SL confirmed what we already knew. He is physically gifted. He reconfirmed his ability to score, and shot better from outside than he did last season. He is an aggressive defender who needs to pick his spots in order to avoid picking up ticky-tack fouls and allowing his opponent to beat him off the dribble. Bayless averaged about 17 pts and 4 assists per game. What seems to have set off the rabble is the fact that folks expected him to have more assists and fewer turnovers. The fact that he didn't meet crazy expectations, and had turnover problems is now taken by many as "proof" that he "will never be an NBA PG."

I would strongly argue that Bayless was placed in a situation where he was almost bound to fail. In a very perimeter oriented league, he was given almost no one to pass to. The two SGs were something like 3-23 for the first three games of Summer League. The starting SF was a defensive specialist with a very limited offensive repertoire. Cunningham was essentially the only other scorer on the team besides Jeter who was backing up Bayless for the first three games.

In response to pointing out these very obvious facts, Bayless' critics have argued that it wasn't so bad. As evidence to support their claim, they point to the fact that Jeter, had a slightly higher assist total per minute than Bayless. My response is pretty simple: of coarse Jeter "looked better" as a distributor. Jeter was a four year starter at PG in college. He has been fairly successful in two years in Europe's top league. Jeter is far more experienced than Bayless as a distributor. Bayless had one year of college where he played out of position as a SG. He played only 600 minutes last season, and many of those were not at the point. Bayless is "very raw" as a distributor. It showed. Jeter is never going to be the defender or scorer that Bayless will likely become.

Certainly, many hoped that Bayless would show more in SL. However, the response of many fans has been a gross overreaction. Listen to Coach Prunty's comments on Courtside over at the Blazer website. He specifically said that he was very surprised that so many people had been so concerned with Bayless' stats. He went on to say that Bayless needs experience making PG decisions about when to pass and when to try to score.

I remain astonished by the number of people who seem to think that the court vision and recognition skills needed to make these decisions effectively are some kind of "mystical gift" that can not be practiced or improved. Part of being an effective PG is knowing your teammates and where they need the ball to be effective. The Blazers SL team practiced for a total of three days, and yet a couple of handfuls of turnovers are taken as "undeniable proof" that Bayless "will never be an NBA point." Such a notion is, frankly, absurd.

Miller Time

Now let's turn to the signing of Miller. What does this tell us about what KP and Nate are thinking? Of coarse, none of us can be sure of anything, but it seems likely that signing Miller is a case of KP wanting his cake and eating it too. He is trying to improve the team for the short term while still believing that Bayless is a good prospect for the long term.

Media reports suggest that KP had an opportunity to get Hinrich, but was unwilling to part with Bayless. Hinrich would likely be a better fit than Miller because of age and defense. The fact that he passed on Hinrich for Miller suggests that Bayless is still very much in his long range plans. KP also chose not to pursue Sessions. Bringing in another young PG would have been a vote of "no confidence" in Bayless.

KP likely hopes that Bayless can be talked into remaining patient this year while he works on his game. If Bayless shows rapid development, KP may even look to trade Blake's expiring contract prior to the trade deadline. If Blake is still critical to the teams success, he will decide what to do next summer. If Bayless demonstrates sufficient progress he is likely to become the heir apparent when Miller leaves.

Summary

I don't expect that anything I have written is going to change any one's opinion regarding Bayless' future. Everyone has a right to there own opinion. I would ask folks to at least think before heaping abuse on Bayless. You may not see his potential, but KP and Nate appear to have a different opinion. Please consider the possibility that your judgements may have been a bit hasty or harsh. If Bayless were the "bust" that many have suggested, would he have been a consensus lottery pick? Would he have been SL MVP? Would we have been invited to Team USA development squad? Would KP have turned down Hinrich to keep him? At least consider the possibility that he may have a future. Whether or not he becomes an adequate distributor, remains an open question. Any one who presumes to know the answer, at this point, is engaging in hubris.

Why our cap space next year isn't the same as RLEC last year

upper left corner — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:20:23 -0000

I have read several references to RLEC in recent days. Those who feel strongly that the team needs to make a move, and make it now, seem to be arguing that waiting to use our cap space until closer to the 2010 trade deadline is analogous to last seasons failure to make use of RLEC. Basically, the argument is something like this, "don't talk to me about all the bargains that are going to be available as the trade deadline approaches, I heard that line last year and nothing happened. Get a deal done now!"

I see your point, and I feel your pain, but there are several reasons I think the current situation is different than the situation last February. Let's break it down and discuss after the jump.

Let me begin by saying I am not an expert on the cap and luxury tax. If any of you "capologists" out there think I am missing relevant info, please chime in to the discussion.

Here is a list of reasons why I think the two situations are different:

1) Lower cap and tax threshold for next season: In February 2009, there was a lot of economic uncertainty, but the actual pain is going to be very real next season. The cap and the tax level both came down between $1-2 million for next season. My understanding is that teams can go into the season above the tax level without actually having to pay the tax, as long as they reduce salary before the 2010 draft. This reality is likely to put pressure on several teams to dump salaries during the season.

2) Expected sharp drop in cap and tax for 2010-11: More significantly, the league released estimates for the cap and tax thresholds for next summer. The cap is expected to drop significantly by about $7 million dollars. This reduction is likely to be the 800 lb gorilla of teams financial moves next year. Many teams are going to need to reduce salaries or face large tax consequences the following season.

3) As everyone knows, next summer has a huge free agent crop: Teams are going to need to shed salary to position themselves to have sufficient room under the cap to compete for these marque free agents. New York, New Jersey, and Chicago are three teams that are expected to try to be in the hunt for LeBron, Bosh, Wade, etc. Because the cap is expected to fall significantly, these teams need to shed salary if they are going to offer max deals to these superstar FAs.

4) In addition to cap room, the Blazers have two quality expiring contracts: Both Outlaw and Blake are in the final year of their contracts. This means the team can potentially package one, or the other, or both, with the cap room to take back a very large contract. Blake and Outlaw are each at about $4 million per year. The Blazers will have about $9 million in cap space once the season starts and the cap holds for the Euros are lifted. Packaged together, that means the team could take back a whopping $17 million contract. Other teams are more likely to do a deal if they are getting back decent players in the short run. It is a lot easier to get your fan base to accept a salary dump of a big name player, if you are getting back Blake or Outlaw, rather than a corpse like RLEC.

5) Teams have to walk a fine line between being competitive and being financially prudent: Before the season begins, every team is a winner, every team at least harbors illusions of being competitive. Teams need to nurture this fantasy in order to get season ticket holders to renew for the upcoming season. This is particularly true for the worst teams, in the smallest markets, under the most financial pressure. Trading away players now, may have a real cost at the ticket office. By February, illusions of improvement will have faded and the grim reality of losses on the floor, and on the balance sheet, are likely to be pressing on numerous owners.

With its combination of cap space and quality expiring contracts, Portland is uniquely positioned to take advantage of the realities of the current economic situation. The cap and tax reductions are tied to overall league revenue. The reason they are expected to drop significantly next summer is because revenue is expected to be down sharply this season. Reportedly, the Blazers have the highest percentage of season ticket renewals in the league at over 90%.

Many teams are likely looking at a very grim revenue picture. Ticket sales are only one piece of the puzzle. Luxury suite sales are down as corporations are cutting back. Broadcast revenue is down because broadcasters are hurting for ad revenue. Merchandise sales and concession sales are off sharply as consumers try to cut back on non-essential expenses.

Summary: Given the combination of factors outlined above, I think the Blazers have a much better chance of finding a willing partner for an unbalanced trade this year than last year with RLEC. I am not a huge fan of trade scenarios, because of the highly speculative nature of most of the discussions. I am a fan of discussing the Blazers strategic situation. My feeling is that KP and team management are taking the right approach. They tried to go after their #1 FA target. Now, having been stymied by factors beyond their control, they are taking a patient approach; waiting for the right deal to come along.

Poll

How confident are you that Blazers management is taking the right approach with the teams cap space?

Absolutely, in KP I trust.

162 votes

Kinda, sorta, I'm not happy, but I am willing to go along for now.

130 votes

KP screwed up and missed his opportunities, now we have no choice.

23 votes

Heck no, fire KP immediately, and hire me to be the new GM!

5 votes

320 votes | Poll has closed

Discussing Failure

upper left corner — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 15:50:42 -0000

Quick has said KP is dealing with "failure." Canzano has said this summer has been a "disaster." Fan anxiety is at record levels for the KP era. What are we to make of such hyperbolic language? Are those who defend KP, "blind homers"? Have the team's aspirations for a Championship taken a big hit?

Let's discuss after the jump.

What follows is a lengthy comment I wrote in another Fanpost thread. Someone commented that I should make this a Fanpost, and I am taking them up on the suggestion:

"Turn off Canzano. Step away from the radio. Put down the newspaper. Everything is going to be OK.

I appreciate you baring your anxieties, but think you and many others are grossly overreacting.

What has actually happened this summer? Did the team make a bunch of lousy draft picks? No. Did the team make a bunch of lousy trades? No. Did the team overpay for for FAs? No.

Let’s actually review what has happened, as opposed to what has been rumored:

DRAFT: The Blazer’s draft strategy was to pick up as many useful players as possible without tying up cap space with a bunch of first round draft picks. They were rumored to be targeting Hansbrough, but it didn’t work out when he was picked earlier than expected. They used their first pick on a talented Euro who many believe will be a quality player down the road. They maneuvered to get two of the top three picks of the second round, and picked two four year college guys that they think can contribute. They got a potential diamond in the rough in Patty Mills.

ANALYSIS: Slightly disappointing that they didn’t get their targeted player, but these things happen when you are drafting in the bottom third of the draft. The jury is out on the guys they did pick, but they executed their strategy which was to preserve cap space.

FREE AGENCY: They had a plan.

1) They targeted Turkoglu because he is a very skilled player with experience who could address team needs for scoring and play-making. They made their pitch and everyone thought it was successful. Hedo changed his mind because of factors completely beyond the control of the Blazers, Stuff happens. This is more of a reflection on Turk than on team management. Move on.

2) KP worked the phones and looked at his options. He passed on some players who might have been useful but that he apparently didn’t think would fit the time line or were not big enough improvements to warrant pulling the trigger. He seems to have tried to work a three way deal with Chicago and Utah. When the price, Bayless, was too high, he decided to force Utah hand by going after Millsap. He cooked up an offer that is hard for Utah to match, but that is reasonable enough that we will be happy if they don’t.

ANALYSIS: It is too bad that the Turk thing didn’t work, but that was a mixed blessing anyway. They gave it their best shot, and can’t be blamed for the fact that it didn’t work out. They didn’t panic. They made a savvy move for Millsap, and if it doesn’t work, they will still be one of the few teams left with cap room. The team may be able to get some of the remaining FAs at bargain basement prices, or they are well positioned for lopsided trades as the trade deadline approaches.

CONTRACT EXTENSIONS: We know very little. It is quite possible that Brandon is asking for an opt out clause and the the Blazers offered a four year deal as a way to negotiate for a later opt out clause. Even in the worse case scenario, where a deal doesn’t get done, the Blazers will be in position to match any offers. As Dave suggested in his front page piece, they need to show some spine because they are going to have to sign extensions for a slew of players over the next couple of seasons. Nothing indicates that the team is unwilling to pay Brandon what he is owed. LMA will probably wait until Brandon gets his deal.

ANALYSIS: It is very early. We know very little. Obviously Brandon’s agent is applying pressure by going public. Canzano and Quick are fanning the flames of fan anxiety. Frankly, I will be extremely surprised if this is not resolved in the next month. In the mean time, there is no need to panic.

SUMMARY: Absolutely nothing has gone wrong, a few things have not gone right, but nothing major has gone wrong. KP has made zero bad moves. Some may argue that he has missed opportunities in the draft or the FA market, but KP’s track record as an evaluator of talent has been very good. Until he shows a pattern of bad decisions, KP certainly deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Patience is a good thing. If the trade deadline comes and no moves have been made, that will be a serious mistake, but right now the basic economics of the league suggest that the longer we wait and the fewer teams able to provide cap relief, the more talent we will get for our money."

ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS: What happens between now and the trade deadline is very important to the Blazer's future. Once we go over the salary cap, talent acquisition is going to be much more difficult. However, the Blazer's Championship aspirations are much more dependent on the development of the talent we already have under contract than the acquisition of one or two additional players.

There is a big difference between being stymied on a potential move, and making the wrong move. Being stymied is cause for disappointment, it is not cause for panic. Failure is making the wrong move. Failure is trading away young talent for an older player in decline. Failure is grossly overpaying for FA talent. The Blazers are still in the hunt for improvement, as hard as it is for fans to be patient, patience is the smart move, patience is the right move.

It is all about the Blazer's sophomores

upper left corner — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:55:05 -0000

It is time to take a break from all the endless speculation about the draft, free agents, and trades. Let's talk about something that really matters: the development of the teams outstanding collection of sophomores. I would argue that the development of these four guys is a lot more important to the teams future than any single player we may acquire with our cap room.

What follows started as a response to Dave's front page piece. It just got too big to post in that thread. I realize that it is generally bad form to duplicate front page material in a Fanpost, but I have been thinking about making a post along these lines for some time now. Hope you all understand, and hope this provokes some good discussion. In particular, I am interested in hearing other peoples takes on the chances that our sophomores will grow up to be the big men on campus. More after the jump

Fifteen years from now when we look back at this era of the Blazers, I think we will see that the future of the team rested on the shoulders of our four sophomores. At this point, we know who Roy and LMA are, we may not know exactly how far they will develop, but the general outline is there for all to see.

What is less certain is the development of our four sophomores. If everything goes well, and all four reach their full potential, the Blazers are likely to be a dynasty. Batum, Rudy and Bayless can each answer a huge question mark for the team:

1) Batum: Nic could become our lock down perimeter defender, the guy who can slow down Kobe and LeBron and the other future superstar perimeter players (Durant?). Offensively, he could be as limited as Battier, or he may exceed Prince. If he does, he will provide a scoring compliment that will make it nearly impossible for teams to double LMA and Roy. Batum's success will mean success for both Roy and LMA. He doesn't have to ever become a 20 pt scorer, he just needs to be a constant threat, a guy who can score opportunistically and who can find his open teammates.

Chance of becoming a top perimeter defender and solid spot-up shooter: 85%

Chance of becoming a good scorer and play-maker in addition to the above: 60%

2) Rudy: he could become a top flight sixth man. A guy who who is such a good shooter that you dare not leave him open for a second. The kind of player who is an assassin off the bench with his ability to get open and hit the three. Think of Rudy as our potential Reggie Miller. The other team knows he is going to shoot the long ball and tries to stop him, but he is so good working off screens and shoots with such a quick release, you just can't keep him from getting his shot off.

The question with Rudy is that it is unclear whether or not he can add other components to his game besides the long ball. So far, Rudy doesn't seem to have enough size and strength to get to the rim very often. He is not good enough off the dribble to get enough separation to shoot a high percentage from mid-range. A few pounds of muscle certainly wouldn't hurt. A better handle would help as well.

Given his lack of strength and his, mediocre by NBA standards, lateral quickness, Rudy is unlikely to ever be more than an average defender. Rudy is 24, and has been a pro for 6 years. He is much closer to his ceiling than the other three sophomores. To my eyes, Rudy has less potential to become a truly outstanding all around player than the other three. However, because of his extraordinary potential as a shooter, his flare for the game, and his relentless energy without the ball, he is an extremely valuable commodity. Great shooters are a rare commodity. Great shooters who understand when to shoot and when to pass are even rarer. Rudy didn't set the rookie record for threes by chance. Rudy's potential ceiling as an all around player may be lower, but he is, by far, currently the most skilled of our sophomores.

Chance Rudy becomes a quality sixth man, providing energy and outstanding spot-up shooting off the bench: 90%

Chance Rudy becomes a top sixth man, and an all-around scorer off the bench: 50%

3) Bayless: By far the most controversial of the four. Some see him as nothing more than a undersized SG with a broken shot. Those with this view want to trade him as quickly as possible. Others see him as "the point guard of the future," a sure fire bet to devour the league. My own take, expressed ad nauseum, is cautious optimism.

Bayless played a total of 600 minutes last season. His season stats are poor, but I think the season stats are misleading. They include a high percentage of garbage time minutes, a fair amount of minutes at the SG, and even a fair number of minutes where Bayless effectively played the SF role in a three guard line-up. During the one stretch of fairly decent minutes where he actually played the point, his PER was over 15, his FG% was 48%, and he averaged about 4 assists on 20 minutes of PT.

Regardless of whether or not you regard Bayless' performance last season as a case of the glass being one third full, or two-thirds empty, we should not forget who this guy is. Bayless was a McDonald's All-American. He was recruited by Lute Olsen to be the PG at PG University. He was expected to be drafted between 4-8 in last years draft, and it was a minor miracle that he dropped to us at eleven. Most evaluators believe that if he had waited till this year, he would have been top 5. If we had just gotten him, we would be salivating.

How he got to be so controversial is interesting. Many of the complaints and negative evaluations of Bayless that get thrown around come from those who preferred Sergio's game. These folks naturally looked at Bayless with a built in negative bias. Fortunately, there is pretty strong evidence that Bayless is viewed differently by team management. Sergio is gone. The team did not trade up to grab another PG in the draft. KP singled out Bayless as a guy he thought would make a huge leap over the summer. Bayless was invited to return to the Team USA development squad with the big three. Obviously, Bayless is still viewed as a truly outstanding prospect by those who know the most.

If Bayless finds his shot, he is going to become a multi-threat offensive force: able to penetrate at will; strong enough to finish a high percentage at the rim; able to stop on a dime and elevate for the jumper off the dribble; able to shoot a decent percentage when left alone on the perimeter: or able to drive past a recovering defender. Roy described defending Bayless in practice as being like defending D Wade. Think about that comparison for a minute. As a defender, Bayless has the strength, speed, and aggression to, at least, become an above average defender. I think it is just a matter of time on the court.

The real question with Bayless is can he learn to run a team? And, assuming he can, how long will it take? This is the caution part of my cautious optimism. Some guys figure it out, some guys don't. Bayless does not appear to be selfish, nor uncoachable. He is smart and a relentless worker. To me, I think he has a good chance to succeed, but it makes sense for the team to not put all of its eggs in Bayless' basket.

Chance Bayless becomes an effective multi-threat scorer and above average defender: 75%
Chance Bayless becomes the above and becomes an adequate distributor: 65%

4) Oden: Why save Oden for last? Because Oden is by far the most important. If one of the other three fails to live up to their potential, the Blazers will have a significant role to fill, but the teams future success will not be endangered. Oden is the fulcrum on which the teams future will be determined. If Greg becomes the dominant rebounder and defender we all hope he will be, and if he develops one or two good low post moves to compliment his put-backs, the Blazers will be challenging for titles for as long as the big three are wearing Red and Black.

It is pretty simple: dominant big men are the rarest commodity in basketball, and because of their position on the court, they are involved in a huge percentage of plays. If Greg becomes dominant, everything else will become easier.

Chance GO becomes at least a 14 and 12 center, who is a defensive force: 90%
Chance GO becomes a dominant scorer on top of rebounding and defense: 60%

Is the glass half full, or is it half empty?

upper left corner — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 15:36:39 -0000

Crazy days here at B Edge. Half the inmates are on the verge of calling for KP's head. At least half seem to be upset at the prospect of Turkoglu in black and red.

Has KP suddenly lost his touch?

On one hand, the ambivalence, and even anger, seems understandable. Most of us went into the off-season believing that the teams top two priorities were an upgrade at the point and at back-up PF. A few were advocating for more scoring from the SF position, but most were willing to develop Nic and Martell. Furthermore, most of us were more concerned about improving the teams defense, rather than trying to improve its already efficient offense.

Given this context, it is not surprising that many have leaped to the conclusion that our once brilliant GM has suddenly lost his mind. Spending all our precious cap space on a slow, 30 year old SF, who is at best inconsistent on the defensive end, doesn't seem like a very good idea. I understand this reaction.

Maybe a bit more humility would be advised

On the other hand, it is pretty surprising that so many B Edgers have been so quick to abandon the good ship, HMS Pritchard. After all, KP has compiled a truly outstanding track record over the past three years. It flat out amazes me how many fans are quick to substitute their own judgement for KP's. Personally, I am happy to admit that KP knows a heck of a lot more than I do. He has access to far more information than any of us. He is the guy with the "golden gut" who has been so successful at identifying talent and figuring out how to get it to Portland.

I may not know what the plan is, but I am sure that KP has one. KP seems to be playing three dimensional chess when most GMs are playing checkers. I don't want to get too carried away in my praise, KP puts on his pants one leg at a time, just like the rest of us. It is possible that he can make a mistake, and it is even possible that he could make a very large mistake. However, given his track record, doesn't it make sense to give KP the benefit of the doubt? Rather than criticizing every move that we didn't anticipate, why don't we try to understand his strategy as the moves unfold? Criticizing KP seems like the height of hubris.

What is the deal with Hedo?

As I mentioned above, Hedo seems like the answer to the wrong question. We need defense and improved play at PG and PF. My guess is that KP concluded that he couldn't really improve our PG situation through Free Agency. The top three PGs are 36, 34, and 32 years old. Given the every increasing number of uber-quick, young PGs in the league, those guys are extremely likely to struggle on the defensive end.

After thinking about it for the past couple of days, I think Hedo is an excellent example of KP thinking outside of the box. If you can't find a traditional PG, then how about addressing a need for more play-making by acquiring a point forward? If you throw out the position labels and start thinking about team needs, Turkoglu starts making a lot of sense in a hurry. Team needs:

1) Playoff experience: more than the rest of the squad combined;

2) An additional scorer who can get his own shot and perform under pressure;

3) Reduce the teams over-reliance on Roy's isolation moves;

4) An additional play-maker who can get easy shots for his teammates;

5) A player who can run the pick and roll effectively:

Hedo is "Trout Plus." He can score like Trout. He can spread the floor like Trout. He can take big shots like Trout; but he can also do much more: he can bring the ball up court, he can drive to the hoop, above all, he can set-up his teammates. Turkoglu has an extremely high BBIQ. Unlike Travis who often stopped the movement of the ball, Hedo is a consummate set-up man.

KP: "Above all else, Hedo is a player who will make his teammates better"

This is the money quote. What does KP mean? I think it is likely that he means the following:

1) Hedo helps Roy: by providing another ball-handler and scorer Hedo takes weight off of Roy and makes it harder for teams to double. If Roy is handling PG responsibilities, Hedo can bring the ball up-court.

2) Hedo helps Greg: Hedo is going to get Greg easy scoring opportunities off of good passes and the side pick and roll. D Howard is not much better in the low post than Greg, and yet he is scoring nearly 20 pts a game. Much of the credit should go to Hedo.

3) Hedo helps LMA: opponents often sagged off Nic to double LMA. They won't be able to do that now.

4) Hedo helps Blake: Hedo will draw much more defensive attention and more spot up shots for Steve.

5) Hedo helps Bayless: Bayless will have an easier time getting on the floor for minutes with the starters with Hedo able to shoulder some of the distribution responsibilities.

6) Hedo may even help Batum: Hedo may help mentor Nic on the offensive end and help him learn how to become our next generation point forward.

7) Hedo will help Rudy: by shouldering some of the play-making duties, Hedo may make it possible for the Blazers to play with Roy and Rudy together in the back-court.

The only players who will not be helped are Trout and Martell who are likely to see their minutes substantially reduced. If Hedo is signed, Trout is almost certainly gone. Webster is a big question mark, and the team really can't count on him until he proves the foot is healed.

All in all, I think Hedo is a brilliant, if unconventional, solution to many of the teams needs. Yesterday on Wheels at Work, the Sacramento play by play guy said that he was certain that Turkoglu would put the team over the top. I think that sounds about right. If that is the future, we make look back at this as one of KP's best moves.