I would. Without question. Oden has been a rebounding machine. He plays only 23 minutes or so and gets over 8 rebounds per game. Oden is already one of the best rebounders in the game, on a per-minute basis. Fouls are his main problem at the moment. The fact that he was recruited to play point guard and was going to play point guard at Arizona is certainly more evidence that he is one than you have presented that he isn't one...that evidence being nothing but your say-so. He's a classic combo guard. A player who has a scoring mentality, point guard skills, but may not have the court vision and instincts to be an NBA point guard full-time. It would take away a large part of Roy's value, which is his ability to direct the offense and distribute the ball. Playing Roy off the ball would not be using him optimally. He's not a catch-and-shoot or catch-and-drive player. I'm sure he could do that, but that would waste his play-making skills. Roy is best used the way Kobe Bryant is used (not to suggest Roy is as good as Kobe). Allowing him to dominate the ball and direct the flow on offense. A true point guard would need the ball in his hands, in order to do his job, and that would not be ideal. The best complement to a player like Kobe or McGrady or Roy, or that type of player, is someone who can also pass but is more of an off-the-ball player and who can defend point guards.
Not quite, he is closer to 7 RPG than he is to 8 RPG. Oden might be playing less minutes, but I don’t know if rebounding rate is good enough to determine who the better rebounder is. Does Oden have the stamina to play 34 MPG and rebound at the same rate? Can he do it in a run and gun offense like David Lee? Does he get as many back taps to teammates as Lee? Those are all questions to consider. I don’t think you can say Oden is without question the superior rebounder, it’s definitely up for debate. His playing style does not reflect that of a point guard. He could technically be labeled as a point guard, but that doesn’t matter unless he decides to play like one plays like one. For example, Jamal Crawford was also drafted as a point guard but plays nothing like a one. You just proved why he’s a tweener He doesn’t have ideal SG height, but he doesn’t have the instincts or court vision to play point guard fulltime. A combo guard is a player that can comfortably play both positions on both sides of the ball. You don’t have to be a catch and shoot/drive player to mesh with a distributor. Roy will still have plenty of opportunities to isolate and create for himself and his teammates. Furthermore, a distributor can have scoring ability as well. Derrick Rose is the perfect example. Do you really think a player like Derrick Rose will be lowering Roy’s value? I don’t know, man. I think a distributor can make everyone better, including Roy. Even Kobe wanted Jason Kidd a couple of years ago. At the end of the day, players with great scoring abilities like Kobe and McGrady are better off focusing on scoring than they are setting up the offense.
It's up to debate, anything is. I just don't think the numbers are deceptive. Oden is an enormous rebounding presence. Lee is a good rebounder, but he doesn't seem at all dominant to me, when I watch him. He was playing shooting guard at Arizona, so that affected his playing style. I assume that's what you're referring to when you talk about his playing style, since he hasn't played enough NBA minutes to have established a "playing style" at this level. At Arizona, he was pencilled in as the point guard, but had to be shifted to shooting guard when their expected shooting guard was injured. Playing shooting guard, of course he wouldn't play like a point guard. That doesn't say much for what he "really" is. I think he isn't a true point guard at the NBA level, but I think he has the potential to be a scoring point guard, like a prime Stephon Marbury or Steve Francis. A combo guard isn't a player who can "comfortably play both positions." Almost all combo guards are scoring guards who don't quite have the ability to be a true point guard. Anyone who can be a true point guard plays point guard, because true point guards are far rarer and more valuable than shooting guards. IMO, "combo guard" refers to skillset and "'tweener" refers to size. Bayless is a combo guard because he has skills of both point guards (ball-handling, passing) and shooting guards (shooting, slashing, finishing). He's not a 'tweener, because he's not "in between" point guard and shooting guard heights...he's ideal point guard size. He'd be a bigger point guard, but not oversized. I'm not saying that a distributor can't have scoring ability or that only catch-and-shoot players can mesh with distributors. My point is that two people can't be primary on-the-ball players. Roy's strength is that he's capable of being a primary on-the-ball player. Those types of players (who are also really good) are fairly uncommon. Another primary on-the-ball player would mean that either he or Roy would be wasting that ability to be able to run the offense. It's not like I'd turn down a young Steve Nash, or a current Devin Harris or Derrick Rose. But since Portland doesn't have one, paying what it would cost to get such a player would be a waste since Portland doesn't need such a player with Roy.
David Lee is one of the better rebounders in the game. We're slowly building the best bench in the League if we are able to land Lee. I would not give up Bayless. I view him as our future starter next to Roy. Last week an article stated the Knicks are looking at three PG's naming Sergio as the one they really like of the three (Atkins, Felton were the others). PG: Bayless SG: Fernandez SF: Webster PF: Lee C: Przybilla
Larry Brown loved Lee in New York, I'm thinking that us trading for Lee is part of a larger scheme to turn around trade him to Charlotte. I'm thinking that Pritchard is going hard after G. Wallace hard and he knows that Charlotte really wants Lee and that if they get him and can throw in another player, say Outlaw it could work. If that's the case, I think it would be worth taking a gamble on getting rid of Bayless for a fairly young and still in his prime G. Wallace. I think if it goes down, it won't be a 3 team deal. It will be more along the lines of what happened when he was traded to Atlanta and then turned around traded to Detroit a couple days later. G. Wallace would be a perfect fit. A great defender, a guy who doesn't need plays called for him to be effective and an excellent team guy who never oversteps his role and acts like a player he's not. High character guy and brings us a lot of toughness that we desperately need. I don't think there's a better, more reasonable fit out there than G. Wallace.
- NY Daily News (Via Hoopshype) This sounds a lot better than what we heard yesterday. So Channing Frye for David Lee is the deal. How can you not do this? There is probably a lot more to the package. If I remember correctly, KP tried to land Lee instead of Frye on that draft night deal.
That's my recollection too. The only thing I would fear would some team way under the cap offering him a ridiculous amount of money this coming off season, making it next to impossible (or at least incredibly foolish) for the Blazers to retain him.
I'm a big fan of Lee. If we could get him here as a backup I'd be ecstatic. However, there are some caveats. I wouldn't want to see significant value traded for him unless KP were convinced he'd accept a backup role and re-sign after this year. However, even if he won't stick around, if all we have to give up is something like Frye or Rodriguez (which I'd be surprised if thats true), I'd be ok with a half year rental. There's always the opportunity to sign and trade him in the offseason, and he'd definitely help for this season.
Yes, but Frye is a perfectly acceptable cost for a half-season rental, IMO. Essentially, get Lee as the team's primary power forward the rest of the year, and then have none of Lee, Frye and Diogu at the end of the season...which is where we'd be even if we didn't make the deal. I just seriously doubt we can get Lee for Frye. But if we can, great.
