It took Nate 5 yrs and Brandon going down to finally trust Aldridge. I can only imagine how long it will take him to trust Batum.
To be fair, Aldridge wasn't an assertive player and neither is Batum. Being assertive has its good points and bad points, but it's hard to know what you're going to get, from a scoring perspective, from a player who's willing to defer quite a lot. I don't tend to form value judgments about player's character from their play on-court, so I don't think deferring means that a player is meek or weak or scared. I think players like Aldridge and Batum probably think that the team is better served by one extra pass when they defer. The problem is that there are only so many "easy shots" in a game, and you need some players who are willing to take the difficult shots because they're more talented and more likely to make them than their teammates. Aldridge has finally started taking the difficult shots rather than passing the ball again to help his team find an easy shot. Batum won't make the leap until he also starts doing that (and also shows that he has the talent to routinely knock them down...if he doesn't have that talent, developing the mindset to take the tough shots will actually weaken him as a player).
The problem is that we wont truly know that until we try. Which means 36+ mins and more sets for him in the offensive. At very least even if he fails we would have a better understanding of how to use him. Right now, I really dont think he nor the team knows what his role is on this team.
Why do you think he'll follow orders and shoot a lot if he plays 36 minutes, when he won't do so at 30 minutes? What's so special about 36? 30 is plenty of time to get into the groove, get his momentum going, get the oil spread in the carburetor and his joints flexing.
I'm definitely not opposed to Batum playing more minutes. He's been my favorite player on the team for several years and I'd love to see him play more. But jlprk is right in a way...a few more minutes a night isn't going to change his attitude in terms of when to pass and when to shoot. You get development and experience from minutes, but not necessarily aggression. I don't really know how you instill aggression in a player...and further, as I mentioned, if you instill aggression in Batum and it turns out that he can't sustain efficiency while shooting more, you've made him a worse player. So there are risks in how you develop him. That's why McMillan is in a tricky situation with Batum. I think he should play Batum more, but the best way to use Batum and what he should tell Batum to do is not fully clear, IMO.
Yes, I do think 6-10 more minutes a game would help for flow but I think even more important than that is combining that with using him as a true 2nd options and running more sets for him in the offense.
I can kind of see your point but I think Batum is too good of an all around player for that to happen. Maybe thats the homer in me talking.
I'm a huge Batum fan and I've felt he was a tremendous talent since midway through his rookie season. I think it's still uncertain as to whether he's a great scoring talent. He shows bits and pieces of offensive brilliance, but is it only flashes because he hasn't been sufficiently developed or is it only flashes because he lacks the talent to be consistently excellent? Offensive talent is on a sliding scale among NBA players and nearly every NBA player has the capability to be great offensively at times...talent is really measured by how often they can do it.
I guess thats why I like the idea of Nash so much (realistic or not the idea is intriguing). While I dont really see Batum as scoring machine I think he can be a very good 2nd offensive option. I look at what Nash did for the Matrix and I think that Batum is at least as good offensively.
It's a reason why I disliked ditching Andre Miller for Felton. While Miller is not as good as Nash, I do think Miller is very talented at getting teammates involved and I think he was a big part of Aldridge's emergence. I think he might have been able to help Batum, too (and Oden, but hey, there's a scab that we don't need to pick yet again!).
And what pisses me off about that is the main reason we got rid of Miller was that he couldnt shoot from outside. And now we have the worst of both worlds.
It seems like I've read this before, in fact, with every McMillan young player. Then after a few years the player is traded and his critics say, see? He's not starring for his next coach, either. McMillan is not good at developing youth, but Sarge is good at keeping them in line. He's not a teaching (practice) coach, and not an adjustments (gametime) coach...But he projects a good leadership image. He'd do well in the Republican debates and might win some, certainly more than Herman Cain.
Batum has a usage rate higher than Gerald Wallace (16.4) @ 17.8; which is 24th in the league for SFs. Batum's PER is higher than G. Wallace (15.5) @ 18.71; which is 7th in the league for SFs. Batum's TS% is higher than G. Wallace (55.9%) @ 59.1%; which is 8th in the league for SFs. Batum's ORR is higher than G. Wall (4.2) @ 5.7; which is 11th in the league for SFs. Batum's Value Added is higher than G. Wall (71.3) @ 82.9; which is 9th in the league for SFs. Batum's estimated Wins added is higher than G. Wall (2.4) @ 2.8; which is 9th in the league for SFs. Just saying
That's a valid point. And it may not just be Nate. We've got a very recent example of a lanky SF with worlds of athleticism who was told SHOOT! SHOOT! SHOOT! There was a time Travis Outlaw was seen as having superstar upside. Now he's known as a low-efficiency gunner who doesn't much care about defense or team play or pretty much anything outside of taking jumpshots and eating catfish. Batum is definitely a different cat. But you have to kind of wonder how these two players would look if we'd swapped them around. There may be a little less of an interest throughout the organization into making Batum too focused on scoring too early after the Outlaw experience.
Actually it tells us something insane. Look at this number. http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/sg/sort/usageRate Jamal has a higher usage than Batum @ 26.8; which is higher than Aldridge @ 25.2
USG% by itself has NOTHING to do with better. A guy who shoots a lot but at a very low percentage will have a very high USG%. In that case, a high USG% makes him worse, not better. On the other hand, a player who has a high USG%, but scores very efficiently will be an MVP candidate. Jamaal Crawford is currently 10th in the entire league in USG%. He's not an MVP candidate. BNM
Defensive efficiency is much higher this year than in past years with Miller, though. Felton is shooting like crap, but he is still defending well, and not getting blown by on a consistent basis. 4th in DEF EFF this year. 2010-11 - 16th 2009-10 - 15th
