Blake, Roy, and Oden don't/won't run, that's 60% of our starting lineup. I heard an interview with Nate a year ago saying that this team needs to learn how to execute in the half court first, then they'll work on opening it up. I couldn't agree with this philosophy more. Some of you might want to be entertained by a running team, but championship teams execute in the half court.
Okay let's play half court hoops with the new Lakers? Who wins? Lakers and it's not close. How about with the new Spurs? Spurs not even close.. how about with the Nuggs? Look I too agree that half court wins championships but we don't have the team to play into great vet teams strengths like this. We are a distant 4th seed next year and that's being a homer on my part!
Roy is better at SF. The Blake/Rudy/Roy lineup was very potent. I'm just not sure the team wants to make that kind of change (seeing Roy as a starter at SF). If I were tinkering with lineups, I would run: Batum/Rudy/Roy/LMA/Oden as my starters. Rudy or Batum can try and stay with the PGs, Roy or Batum with the SF, Rudy just stays on the SG. This gives you loads of offensive potential, so you can afford to have Batum just distribute, defend and rebound. Batum has at least as good of court vision as Blake and Bayless, and is a solid ball handler. As long as you could figure out a sytem where Batum/Rudy/Roy knew who was supposed to do what, I think that lineup would kick. I don't know enough about the triangle offense, but it seems like Batum/Rudy/Roy would be perfect candidates as they can all shoot the three, all drive and all pass.
I saw absolutely ZERO "stop and pop" last year. I expected it from him, but was disappointed with the result. How he was used was not the problem. How he executed was. He better be working on it because he had more than enough opportunity to demonstrate it. When he does master it, (and i believe he will) then his value on the court will go sky high. Because he does everything else you said well.
I think a lot of the stuff he did in Europe doesn't work against the better defenders in the NBA. When he looked like he was trying, he usually ended up pulling the ball back out or taking a bad shot.
I agree because as good of a shooter he is, he threw up some bricks. A guys like Turk with his length can shoot right over you. Rudy has to study BRoy and imitate how he does it. Roy is always under control and somehow how always is able to get that separation.
People forget what a special rookie year Fernandez had as a three point shooter. Dude made 159 threes while only playing 25 mpg. And he shot it at .400. Ray Allen made 117, 134, 74 and 172 threes in his first four seasons, while averaging about 34 mpg. It took Reggie Miller 6 seasons before he finally made over 159 three pointers. Allan Houston did it in his 3rd season. It was one of only two seasons he ever did it. Dale Ellis, third all-time in the NBA among three pointers made, topped 159 in a season only twice. Peja has only ever done it three times, and the first time he did it he was 6 years into his career. Steve Kerr, a memorable three point specialist who lived his entire career in the role of three point gunner off the bench, never made more than 122 threes in a season, and only even got into triple digits in two seasons. During his 5 year peak in Chicago, he averaged between 22 and 24 mpg, so it's a reasonably fair comparison. Obviously, there's a long, long way to go. But right now Rudy has a nice start on becoming the single greatest three point shooter in NBA history. Just stop and think about that a little before you consign him to role player, bargaining chip, or a guy who should be happy to play 25 mpg forever behind Roy because Ginobili does it. Rudy is the only guy on our team who stands a somewhat realistic shot at being The. Very. Best. Ever. at a career statistical category. And I think he knows it, and so does his agent. So can you really blame him for already grumbling about minutes next year?
was it the last two? or the last half of the home game.. and then game 6? Anywhoo I think rudy came up pretty big in the games he played minus the last game. I dont think he needs to start.. but he is certainly more deserving of minutes than Blake though.
BTW--I obviously left off one guy on that list who could also represent Rudy's career path: Kerry Kittles, the guy whose record he broke (158). In Kittles' second season he dropped down to 110. After that he was never over the century mark, and his career ended after 7 seasons. FWIW.
That's an interesting perspective, but really seems more trivia. Production isn't measured in setting a specific (and pretty niche) record, but in how much you impact your team's chances of winning overall. If he never turns into an efficient, volume scorer or a great distributor or a great defender, or some useful combination of those, the fact that he may eventually break the three-point mark isn't terribly consequential. If Rudy exactly duplicated last season every year for 17 seasons (the number of seasons Reggie Miller played), he'd break the record for all-time three-pointers but never be as good as Ginobili (because last season he wasn't as good as a healthy Ginobili). Three-pointers are useful as a tool to be a productive, dangerous scorer. They aren't an end, themselves.
Well, three point shooting is a subset of shooting. Shooting isn't an end in itself, either. (Unless you are Travis Outlaw. Zing!) The end is in winning. Whatever you do that furthers winning, even if it's spacing the floor by shooting threes accurately, is all that really matters. If he winds up being one of the very best ever at that skill set, I really don't think it'll be trivial. Here's the list of all-time great three point shooters. Obviously, many of these guys had many, many other skills. (As Fernandez does--he's a good passer and a nice finisher at the rim.) If you asked any of them to be happy having a career as Roy's backup, or to live with a leveling of minutes after so much early production, it's pretty easy to see nearly any of them complain as well. http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/fg3_career.html 1.Reggie Miller2560 2.Ray Allen2299 3.Dale Ellis1719 4.Peja Stojakovic1571 5.Glen Rice1559 6.Eddie Jones1546 7.Tim Hardaway1542 8.Nick Van Exel1528 9.Jason Kidd1486 10.Chauncey Billups1432 11.Michael Finley1422 12.Rashard Lewis1419 13.Brent Barry1395 14.Jason Terry1387 15.Antoine Walker1386 16.Steve Nash1360 Dan Majerle1360 18.Paul Pierce1358 19.Mitch Richmond1326 20.Allan Houston1305 21.Terry Porter1297 22.Mookie Blaylock1283 23.Vernon Maxwell1256 24.Clifford Robinson1253 25.Dell Curry1245 26.Damon Stoudamire1236 27.Hersey Hawkins1226 28.John Starks1222 29.Chuck Person1220 30.Dennis Scott1214
No, I'm sure it will help...my point was not that great three-point shooting isn't beneficial, it certainly is. Just that the fact that he could be the all-time leader doesn't necessarily tell us what caliber of overall player he'll be. The list you provide has mostly very good players, but that's probably because to shoot that many three-pointers you generally have to be good enough to get the minutes. But there are plenty of exceptions. Guys like Dale Ellis, Mad Max, Dell Curry, Dennis Scott, John Starks, Chuck Person, etc, were by and large reserve-quality players or borderline starters (Ellis and Starks were sometimes good starters, but often on the borderline of average which means it wouldn't be outrageous if they started or were reserves). I don't blame Rudy for complaining. He was a good player last season, he's still young and he should want the chance to show that he can do more. My only point was that his great "three-point shooting start" doesn't change how one should see him, IMO. He was as good as he was...his three-point shooting was a component of his overall value, it doesn't reflect that his overall value (like his PER) was somehow not indicative. I'd still see him as good trade bait because I don't ever see him becoming a superstar that would make Portland regret trading him (assuming they got some good value back). I do think, though, that comparing him to Ginobili isn't useful. Ginobili is the best player at his position on the Spurs and has been through his NBA career. He's come off the bench, but essentially been their third-most important and used player. Fernandez is unlikely to ever be the best player at his position on Portland and is almost guaranteed to lag behind at least 4 players in terms of role and minutes and maybe 5 players (if both Bayless and Batum develop into good players). So, he won't get a "Ginobili role" in Portland.
