He may be no stat-man, but he's good for this team......at least for now. (trade deadline notwithstanding) He's sort of a glue and a nice buffer between Roy and Miller. They both really like Steve, and like playing with him. Shoot, last game, I saw Roy pass open a wide open three and pass to Blake for the same.....which he nailed. Again, Blake isn't gonna dazzle, but he's a solid "role" player and will continue to be the same when the time comes to bring him off the bench, which will probably come sooner than later due to the 3-Guard-lineup match-up issues. At that point, I have no doubt that Blake will work hard to blend with the second unit. From what I've seen throughout the years with this guy is that he is a team player and won't complain about whatever role he's been given. He just brings his lunch pail.
I still have a sneaky suspicion that KP will pull the consolidation trigger prior to this seasons trade deadline. That deal may very well include Blake, whose value keeps increasing as the season rolls along.
However you want to sugar coat this, a spot up shooter who can only hit 35% from the floor is not a "good", nor "solid" player nor filling a "role" It's called an anchor, as in, "We tied an anchor to Vinnie's feet and threw him in the Hudson, because he was as dirty rat." This is not acceptable NBA starting guard play.
You can have your suspicions all you want, but history tells us KP doesn't like mid season trades. He does somehow find a way to be mentioned in every trade conversation somehow, but that is far from pulling the trigger. Maybe some injuries force it to happen this year. Maybe they just open the door for some hungry players who have been quietly waiting their turn.
The amazing thing is Blake just isn't hitting the "wide-open" shots he's normally accustomed to hitting. When that falls, our offense will really open up. I've seen teams really collapse on us defensively, which is giving Blake some wide-open looks. Hell they are giving Roy some wide-open looks as well. If we could hit about 40% of those shots, we would be smoking hot. Normally we are 45% on those shots alone last season.
That sounds like the worst flavor over an Oreo cookie ever. "What's the white stuff between the Oreo cookies? Elmer's Glue! "
My suspicion is based upon the maturity/skill levels this team has attained. Prior to this season, the team was a bit young to engage in consolidation activity. They were still in an evaluative state. Plus, there are expirings (i.e. Pryz, Blake, Travis) which enter into this entire equation.
At the same time, by waiting for a guys value to be known better, you may actually decrease their value due to upside value no longer being there, and the fact that a lot of our tradeable assettes are hurt.
I want to see how the team responds to losing Outlaw. He is Roy's best friend, and a bit of a safety net for McMillan. If we keep going and don't skip a beat, I think it will make trading him that much easier.
I love Blakey the person, and the 10 minute a game 3 point shooting specialist. I hate Blakey the starter who plays 28.5 minutes per game.
So, he's suddenly lost skill level? I doubt it. Again, in my OP, I never stated that he should be starting. In fact, I more or less stated the opposite. What I AM saying is that he's a team player with some skills and will play whatever role is assigned to him. I've just been seeing a lot of negative posts slung his way.
I am very interested as well. Because I actually think the team will be better without him. The ball movement on the 2nd unit should improve, the shot selection on the 2nd unit should improve. The rebounding on the 2nd unit should improve. The basektball IQ on the 2nd unit should improve.
Trade him for who? I like Outlaw as a person but even before his injury I don't think he has as much trade value as some in here thinks he does. I bet if we heard what some of the other teams were offering us for him the majority of us would rather keep him and let him walk away at the end of the season. Outlaw is a backup. I don't think he's going to develop much more. What you see is all you're ever going to get.
Basketball is tricky as to get a good situation where players feel comfortable. The elephant in the room is that Blanky is starting at SG when we have Rudy and Bayless. That situation and the downside of it might be all it takes for several players on the team to not play their best. It doesn't matter if they are "looking over their shoulder", or just feeling the pressure of trying to fill the void of Brandon Roy, who is now playing SF. Whatever it is, the facts are, Blanky is not handling it well.
The only real downside is that Outlaw could carry the team on his back when he was on. I know that wasn't every often, but when Travis went in the zone, he could keep us afloat when nobody else was scoring. That's a nice weapon to have in the arsenal. If only Nate was smart enough to use him correctly.
In short? Yes. He performed well above his personal average for a season and now he's regressed a little below his personal career average. Now he's thirty, and on the back side of his prime and he's had seasons like this before (3 times in fact). Why does everyone act so shocked when a player's production spikes for a year late in their career and then settles back to earth (or below) the next season? John Hollinger even has a term for this phenomena and has been able to identify a consistent statistical trend in players' careers. Here's his excerpt from Joel's profile at ESPN.com: To review Blake jumped from a 12.0 PER the season before to 14.4 last year and has now come back down to earth. That doesn't quite qualify him because his PER only jumped 2.4 points, but it's pretty close to applying here.
