Bayless promoted....Sergio demoted

The sucky thing is that the Blazers are kind of caught in a limbo of trying to do both at the same time.

 

The point is not development. The point is that McMillan may be getting less out of either of them by handling them this way. When both were playing fairly understood roles, during Blake's missed time to injury, they both played like relatively useful players. Since Blake returned and the two have been thrown into chaotic roles, both have played like NBADL players.

My goal is also to do what's best for this year's playoff run (because I think Bayless will develop anyway), and my suggestion was aimed at getting the most out of them now...not developing them for the future.

 

Every team tries (or should try to do) both at the same time. We have reached a phase in the year and in the team's development where you have to take the priority of making the playoffs and fighting for a higher seed (or lower seed, technically) over the development of the backup PG. Let's face it - once this season is over the team can go again to putting emphasis on the future PG position (because, let's face it - this needs an upgrade in this position, at least from a defensive point-of-view).

When you are walking in the desert and there is hope of reaching water debating the merits of organic vs. non-organic carrots is of secondary importance - and the debate can be resumed after you drink that water, even if it does not come in a plastic bottle with a fancy french name on the label...

 

Maybe - I kind of remember both of these guys going through ups and downs when Blake was out as well - with some really good games by Sergio followed by some really bad ones - and to a lesser extent with Bayless. In the grand scheme of things the team seems to win at the same rate when they play crappy and when not - which tells you that they are basically playing 3rd string PG on this team - because Roy and to a smaller extent Rudy also take part in the play-making - these guys might be playing worse as well because the rotation is tightened anyway with them (even as a whole) seemingly squeezed out of playing time by Roy doing more PG work.

For example - Sergio's GameScore when Blake was out looked like this:

2.6, 10.7, 4.1, 7.7, 10.3, 9.1, -2.5, 10.9, 1.2, 2.2, 3.9, 14.2, 0.6, 7.8

A game-score of 10 is average starter in the league - not close to a model of consistency. He had more than his fare-share of bad bad games - sprinkled with some OK games and one that was really nice. Look at the game-logs for Bayless and the pattern is about the same - only with bigger swings.

Yes, his recent game-scores are very bad - but this is not a big deal - both Sergio and Bayless's combined time is going down as we get closer to the end of the regular season - Nate uses them to plug a hole when needed, nothing more, nothing less.

 

I agree. Thats what he did in Memphis. Even though Bayless was terrible in the 2nd quarter, he went back to him at the end of the third. I think Nate was looking ahead knowing that he really needed him tonight against TJ Ford and was hoping the memphis game may help him in the next game. If he struggles tonight, then he has to try Sergio tomorrow against Cleveland.

 

The best players in the league may not always have the best game. But they have a quarter or two that is of note. When it comes to top end scorers, the best players get to the line a lot. That way they can nurse their game along until they get a shooting stroke going, keep pressure on the other team. Bayless has a lot of that built into his game, when he is agressive. If he is playing passive though, you gain nothing. It's all about him coming with his motor running. When it's running, he is dangerous. When it is not, you get to hear a bunch of fans complain about the rookie.

 

Forget about backup for a moment.

We're 11-5 with Sergio starting.

edit: and I should add with Bayless in the backup spot to him, and Blake out of the equation entirely.

That translates to 56 wins, or 1st in our Division, 2nd place in the West and 5th in the league.

Since Blake returned we're 8-5 (translates to 50 wins) and with all Blake's starts we're 33-20 (translates to 51 wins)

The conclusion we can jump to is these 2 guys have got it covered as long as they're not out there together too much, and will obviously improve and maybe both are/will be better than any of us think if only Steve is moved in a Zach-like fashion.

It worked for LaMarcus.

 

i've been calling for this since the beginning of the season. cut blake, get his 4 million.

 

Yeah, because an 11-5 stretch automatically translates to 56 wins right?

Sorry, but Blake is arguably the best 3 point option we have and is a decent passer, and actually knows how to drive to the basket without looking awkward. He's a solid starter and better than both of them right now.

 

If Sergio spent the last two years in Atlanta, we might still be mad we traded him. Hard to say.

 

And Zach was far, far better than LaMarcus but we paid an ernormous sum just to get him gone so his PT could be used to develop LaMarcus.

It's not what the player does, it's how the team does when he's out there with them.

Right now, this is Bayless's weakest link, and why he's not going to pan out as a starting PG ever.

In tonight's blowout against a plummeting team who probably only needed one uniform (Grainger's) TO went 6-16 and Rudy was 5-13, while their PG Bayless had 0 assists again.

 

Now I know you've lost your mind.

 

Bayless is simply playing some poor B-ball and not doing anything to assert himself as the backup PG over Sergio, imo.

 

At the time we traded him, pretty much across the board, and by a wide margin.

Although his potential was obvious to many, LaMarcus really didn't do much of note until Zach was gone and he got the spot, which is my point.

 

With the exception of the NO (won after CP3 got injured) and home Utah game (w/o Boozer), those Sergio "wins" came against teams with less than stellar records. So, I think your argument is a little weak. However, I do agree that Sergio is getting a much shorter leash than the rest of his teammates.

 

This is nonsense - since Zach went down on 3/20 on that season (was it his grandmother that died or something?) and without him in the line-up the Blazers went on a short-win streak with him out of the line-up. He came back and the losing resumed.

Again, look at 82games to see their net gain/win percent and the like.

With Zach on the court the Blazers were +2.1 points per 100 possessions (vs. the time he was off the court)
With LMA on the court the Blazers were +4.7 points per 100 possessions (vs. the time he was off the court)

Even as a rookie playing limited minutes and being somewhat raw - LMA's impact on the game was bigger than Zach's impact (in what was, for all intents and purposes, Zach's career year).

Zach is a very talented offensive player - but he was nowhere near as effective as Aldridge in the grand-scheme of things even when LMA was a rookie. All he did was dominate the ball at the cost of the team's success - and we all know about his defense.

I am not surprised however that you wrongly interpreted his production - since you seem to like another ball-dominating player that hinders the team's success more than he enhances it...