Next year we will be a Powerhouse

You know that if the Blazer players were actually as good as a lot of folks make them out to be on these boards, they would still be in the playoffs right now. Throw out all the stats you want. The Blazers lost, and are out of the playoffs. What matters is your team gets the W when the game is over. Not PERS, not PPG, not assist per game. The W. That is what matters. Do you think upgrades of certain players on the team would help make that L a W? Fuck yes I do. Do I think Steve Blake is one of them? Hell yes I do.

The flat out fact is, none of the Blazer PG got it done this year, and if one of them had, the argument would be moot. The persistence of the argument over the PG spot being present every single day for the last couple of seasons is proof enough that none of them have got it done. The problem being, its like an argument over which futile player is better than the other. The answer is:

None of them are good enough currently, and only one Blazer PG has upside IMO, that is Bayless. The only reason I haven't given up on him, is because he has that upside potential. Hell if I can deal with Travis Outlaw taking 6 years to become an average NBA player, I can live with Bayless taking a couple of years to learn the PG spot and give him a shot, rather than discounting him before he gets a chance.

 

Z-Bo is/was an elite PF offensively.

 

Chris Paul can't "get it done" for New Orleans, and this year his PER was just above Steve Blake. Perhaps New Orleans should do whatever it takes to draft Rubio and dump Paul since he "can't get it done" and isn't playing right now.

 

That is one of the most pathetic arguments I have ever seen, and it isn't remotely tangent to the Blazers situation. Exactly what does Chris Paul have to do with the Blazer situation? Would you care to explain how you make your leap logic here? Chris Paul isn't a hole on his team. Chris Paul gets it done. So exactly what the fuck are you talking about?

 

Huh??? Without even looking it up, I bet you his PER was at least double of Blake's this year. Or any other year.

If you are talking about his 5 playoff games this year, weak argument since he was obviously banged up (as were the rest of the Hornets).

 

Chris Paul didn't "get it done". If he had, he'd still be playing. Actually, his PER of 16 against Denver should concern New Orleans much more than Portland should be concerned about Steve Blake considering Paul is their top player. That's what I was talking about. Blake played adequately in the Houston series. Not great, but not terrible either.

 

I was talking about Paul's playoff flameout.

Also, Steve Blake had shoulder surgery after the season. I guess this means he wasn't "banged up", or maybe Blake had surgery to set up an excuse for himself? Did Paul have surgery? Just wondering...

 

Steve Blake plays decent ball with a shoulder that needs surgery, and the armchairs here blast the guy.

What great "fans".

 

I gotta agree with PapaG here. Blake didn't nearly play as bad as most of you make it seem. Even if I think the whole Chris Paul thing is a bunch of crap, it doesn't change the fact that Blake is being unfairly chewed out here.

 

That may be true, if we are only talking about his performance on offense. Blake was one of the people responsible for making Brooks look like an all-star.

 

Brooks did not look like an all-star. The guy is just streaky as hell. People will remember him for his outbursts in a few games, but totally ignore his crappy play in the others.

 

there is little question that Blake struggles containing the drives of quick/athletic players. I'm sure thats on opposing team's scouting reports and expect to see opponents continue to press this issue.

STOMP

 

The Lakers struggled with it too against Brooks. Continue to see opponents continue to press this issue.

 

I thought Steve did a damn good job keeping Brooks out of the paint. The only real time Brooks did is when we half assed our coverage on the P & R and he would turn the corner on LMA on his way to the hoop (see game 1). Brooks was just his streaky self and got hot from the outside in a couple of the games. Nothing you can really do about it.

But I do agree that if we want to make it further in the playoffs we need a pg that is able to put more pressure on the D in the halfcourt. Hopefully Bayless can be that guy, and I think he can if he can regain confidence in his J that was great in college. All it should take is steady minutes and some refining of his somewhat awkward machanics. Hopefully Townsend will be working with him on that during the summer.

 

Given the rate of historical revisionism going on here, by the end of the summer, we will have won the Houston series 4-0!

The team sucked. They got blown out by a tougher, smarter team. We aren't winning anything unless the team makes substantial improvements. Deal with it!

 

A veteran team. One that was allowed to fail in the playoffs for five years.

 

Certainly Blake is a player with positive attributes including being a big time 3 point threat, but I'd be open to improving the talent level at any position. Some spots just have a little more room to improve then others.

STOMP

 

Of course.

I just don't think any improvement is going to come from the draft.

 

it's doubtful that any rookie in this upcoming class would be an improvement on any Blazer starter next season... I haven't seen anyone arguing that. But in a season or two I could easily see some of these guys becoming better then Blake. I'm happy to have him on the team and all but dude is not so great that our inconsequential blatherings can't touch on various ways of improving the PG position.

STOMP

 

Agreed. However, I personally think Bayless will break out, no need to grab someone in the draft. It's too bad that some people just get so caught up in the pre-draft hype.