I guess that is what I am saying. Right now there are so many players that are question marks. Will oden be plagued by injuries forever? will joel ever be back to full strength? bayless, rudy, batum, and pendergraph all have great potential but will they live up to it on a consistent basis? I guess that is why I would worry about a major consolidation until we know exactly what pieces we still need. We might need a center (starting or backup). we do not know just yet. The one thing that we do know if that we have way to many guards and we could still use a SF. that is the one move I would feel comfortable making right now.
That is also my concern....too many question marks. A team might be able to tolerate 1 injury prone player - just as they can tolerate 1 knucklehead in an otherwise stable locker-room - but this team looks like a freaking MASH unit. If KP is actually building his plans around the notion that Oden, Joel, Rudy, Batum, and Outlaw will all be healthy going forward, then he is walking a tightrope with no net.
Happy New Years all . . . and I'll give KP his props. I like having KP as the GM and think he has done some good and great things. Some posters think I am some kind of KP hater because I said this is a time for him to step up and deal with a tough situation. Never said it was an easy sitaution or that KP is a terrible GM, even said this is a great time for him to shine, but it must have read like I hate KP. Don't hate KP, liked him from the day he replaced Nash. Here is to hoping we can use the term pritchslapped (wispering it this time) in 2010.
I'm not much of a stats guy, but unless I'm missing something, that doesn't look right. The team plays an average of 10 players per game. 20% of those players would be two, and I'm assuming the two would be Roy and LA. They play 31% of the minutes. Adding the 96.5 ppg, 20 apg, 41.5 rpg, 6 stpg and 5 bpg the team averages 169 'production units' (PU's) per game. Between Roy's 23/5/5/1/0 and LA's 16/8/2/1/.5, that's 61.5 PU's. 61.5/169 = 36% of the teams' production. Am I missing something, because that seems a long way from 80%. Where does that come from? Go Blazers
I wouldn't like that trade at all. That seems to me to be gaining a little (maybe) in the short term, but hurting the team long term. Battier is on the downside of his career, and wouldn't improve the Blazers for long, if at all. I sure don't see him as the guy that puts the Blazers into the finals this season. Otoh, I see Rudy as part of a championship caliber three guard rotation, getting enough minutes for him to stay happy. Rudy is young enough to fit the Blazers contender window. Go Blazers
Count me as one giving KP LOTS of credit. I get a kick out of all the wanna be GM's saying he sucks, or is weak. KP has said he likes the guys we have, and feels good about going to war with them. They are still winning with that formula. In my book that makes KP right, again. Go Blazers
I wouldn't worry too much about the trade because I'm pretty sure Daryly Morey would want no part of it. Battier is about 3X the defender Martell is, and about 10X smarter. Battier might only be able to really provide high level play for another couple of years, but he's exactly the kind of player I want Nicolas to learn from in practice. As for Rudy, he plays the same position as our best player; you're kidding yourself if you think he's going to be satisfied with A) 20-25 minutes a night and B) taking less money to stay here so he can be second fiddle to Brandon Roy.
Then Bayless, not Rodriguez, should have gone. And maybe Batum. 24.0 Roy 19.4 Randolph 19.1 Aldridge 18.1 Oden 15.5 Fernandez 15.4 Przybilla 15.1 Outlaw 14.4 Blake 12.9 Batum 12.5 Rodriguez 11.4 Diogu 10.3 Ruffin 10.0 Frye 08.2 Bayless -8.4 Webster http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2009.html (go down to Advanced and click on PER column heading)
the 80-20 rule is mostly a reference to the Pareto Principle and while it doesn't perfectly translate to basketball, the fact remains that teams usually need 2 or 3 stars to provide the bulk of their scoring, rebounding and other measurable statistical output. 2 stars out of 9 player rotation is 22% and while they probably won't score 80% of their team's points, they probably should be producing about 50% of them and assisting or otherwise creating opportunities with steals, offensive rebounds etc. to comprise another 30% of a team's scoring output. You can quibble over the accuracy of the stats and how it all divides out, but it doesn't change the general "rule"
I am pretty sure that he did it only for people that had a consistent playing time to get into the rhythm. It is very hard to make any decision about people that played as little as JB did last year. By the end of the year they had 3 years of data and 2600 minutes of play for Sergio, 2 years of Data in Portland and 2000 minutes of play for Frye, but only 600 minutes of play over one year for JB.
Sorry, I wasn't clear; I meant among the players who had a chance to play in 07-08 and 08-09. Bayless likely got a pass by virtue of being a rookie and the 11th player in the rotation. Frye and Sergio both played themselves clean out of a job in Portland. It's very kind of you to list all the PERs and direct me to the web page, but really you were just being condescending.
I didn't mean to be condescending. I come from the ESPN board, where I saved experienced readers some confusing search time by pointing them directly to what I was talking about. Anyway, the Intel method is the slow boat to China. If I did my job by deleting the 2 most useless things every year, it would take a century to turn the company (team) around. (And the boss would still expect me to point him directly to what I'm talking about.)
LOL, fair enough. In truth, he dropped the bottom 5 players, but 3 were inconsequential. Anyway, on a 10-man rotation, dropping the bottom two is still 20%... so think about that percentage more than the absolute numbers. IMHO, I think he's doing fine with this method.
What, me worry? I was just putting in my two cents on your trade idea. I don't like the idea of giving up Rudy for a two year rental on a guy that may not even start when Nic gets healthy. Even if he's going to mentor Nic. It doesn't seem like either of us thinks Battier gets the team over the hump. As for trading Rudy, I could live with that, if it improves the team for the long haul. I've been saying since around this time last year that if the Blazers can't get Rudy minutes this year, he would want out of Portland. I don't think it's a given that he's gone because Brandon plays on the same team. The three guard rotation could give Brandon 34 minutes a night and Rudy and JB could each get around 31, depending on who's hot. Maybe that's kidding myself, but Rudy might stick around for a major role like that. If not, oh well, but I'd like to see the Blazers do better than Battier. Go Blazers
While I agree that the team could add some size to their mix to achieve more balance, I'd rather that guy be a PF then center. Aldridge is a solid option guarding most Bigs and would make a fine tandem paired with another good PF. When teamed with Travis they present a tough small ball look but I'd love to see another talented good sized PF to pair LA with too. I'm very curious if Freeland can be an option. How legit is his 6'10? How athletic is he? Can he D up at all? What about Claver? Travis sure doesn't seem to have the team over the barrel in his upcoming free agency and the economy in general isn't exactly booming... I wouldn't be surprised to see him back on the cheap if these youngins are in camp next offseason. STOMP
Freeland in action I think he'd get outmuscled pretty easily. For the time being he's mostly a blocks guy - think of him as Birdman type. Watch Claver starting at 48 seconds in in this video. Also this: [video=youtube;DhSmBuB81tg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhSmBuB81tg[/video]
