Ben Golliver, Kicking ass and taking names

But since everyone wants LMA and Oden to take these shots in the paint, you're going to have trouble driving the lane...because there won't be a lane open.

That's also presuming that the defenders who are guarding LMA and Oden don't get any help from the guards. I mean, if I'm facing a team that has two post players and some guards who can't shoot 3's but can "drive to the hoop", I'm just going to sag down my guards and let them double team the post.

You'll also notice that while Greg hits "59% of them"..that's 59% of 5.8 attempts with 30% of those being dunks. I don't think you can extrapolate out that if he took 10 more attempts, 3 of those would be dunks. He gets mostly dunks because his offensive skill set is so limited.

I think that while Ben makes some good points he so obviously loathes Blake that he digs as hard as he can to take shots at him.

 

if only Batum was able to fluidly run the point like PIP then Steve would be perfectly acceptable.

STOMP

 

I think he should stay, just not as the starter. He is the ideal backup because he can step into the starting role if needed. We need a play maker at the PG spot, someone that can get past his man and cause some chaos. We also need someone that can get the ball into the post.

 

Oddly enough Brandon seems to be able to get into the lane just fine with Greg and LaMarcus on the court. It's not like they're just going to plant their butts in the post and sit there waiting for a dump off or lob from a driving point guard. Secondly, while Miller does not have a good three point percentage, he does have a very effective mid-range game and can hit from 12-15 feet at a good percentage -- you don't have to be 23 feet away from a player to space the floor as a point guard, that's what your wings are supposed to do anyway.

Want more evidence that a slashing point guard without a consistent 3 point shot (let alone a reliable jumper) can be effective? Loot at Rajon Rondo, about all he can do to score is drive the lane, yet KG, Davis, Powe, and Perkins all seem to have managed to play alongside him.

I'm really kind of shocked at how defensive people are when it comes to people pointing out Blakes weaknesses as a starter. He's a great spot up shooter and a normally steady hand with the ball, but this team is going to need more out of this position if it's going to compete at the next level.

 

Sort of off-topic, but you know Oden has to be pissed that every time Blake brings the ball down the floor, the normal play is to have Oden set a screen for Blake 20ft away from the basket. Blake then makes his move and Oden rolls and Oden never, I mean never, gets the ball. Seems like a lot of work to do and hardly get rewarded for it.

 

Let's flip this another way: Brandon shot a pretty respectable 38% on threes this year and going into next season we'll have guys like Rudy, Martell and Travis who can all hit the three ball. If we added a point guard like Miller (or whomever) that can slash to the rim wouldn't those guys' shooting open the lane for that player as well? Hell, even LaMarcus is starting show touch out to twenty feet.

I'm not sure what you're point is? If you mean Rondo plays with wings who can shoot, how does that differ from the Blazers?

 

That was a great article. It pointed out all the weaknesses in Blake's game that many people have been complaining about. He is not a true PG, and it would help this team tremendously if we could get one. If Andre Miller signed on, I'd be happy to keep Blake as a backup.

 

This is something that does not happen enough - but it is actually wrong to accuse Blake of never getting him the ball on the pick and roll - Blake actually gave him the ball on these occasions more than anyone else - starting with the 2 consecutive baskets at the start of the Phoenix game - and in the playoffs when he got 2 quick baskets against Yao before the refs gave him some bullshit foul and he had to get out of the game.

I just wish that Roy would do that more with Oden - but Roy's bread and butter pick and something play seems to be with LMA on a high pick and usually a pop for LMA - not a roll for anyone.

 

Unless you mean that literally, I don't agree at all. Miller is known as a very good defender. From what I've seen of him, that reputation is deserved.

 

I would like to the first to wish Blake all the luck in the world with his new team.

The one thing Ben didn't mention that I think is worth stating is the pathetic percentage of shots Blake took that resulted in a foul. A shot by Blake resulted in a foul 2.3% of the time. How in the fuck can that be acceptable in a league where the team that goes to the line more tends to win? All of the rules made by the NBA in the last 10 years favor a small guard who can attack the rim and get to the line. Why would Portland use a player that can't use that to the teams advantage?

As a comparison, Sergio has a 7.6% ratio. Roy has a 13.8% rate. Frye was 3.4%. That is not a misprint. Frye was better at drawing fouls then Blake.

 

Whatever we do, please free the B-Rex

 

Miller also has a draw foul rate similar to Roy ... neither can even carry Jerryd's jock who had a draw foul rate of 18%

 

Interesting diatribe with a lot of truth to it. Unfortunately, there were several holes in his arguments which convinced me more than ever that we need Blake as our backup PG.

 

Because Brandon is a primary option, which requires everyone to space out and leave him in ISO. But you're talking about the guard who would presumably now be the, 4th? option, driving to the lane which goes against the grain of the 2nd and 3rd options.

I'm shocked at how often people pull out the terms "hater" on one side or "defensive" on the other. Because both of them are hogwash in my book - if I criticize Blake I'm a hater if I argue against some details from the consistent, biased pounding of Blake then I'm defensive. No, I'm just stating as in my original post that while the guy has some points even the most inept of readers should be able to infer his obvious bias against Blake and that there are some faults with his logic.

 

I guess I made too general of a statement, my bad. Miller really struggles against quick PG's like Aaron Brooks, so he wouldn't have solved one of the problems we have against the Rockets.

Miller does a good job against bigger points, but I think that is where Blake's defense was fine as well.

 

Well I can't imagine Ben thinks of the 300+ possessions, had we not taken a wide open 3, that we would have got Greg or LMA a dunk. Blake was wide open most likely because there were more defensive players in they key than offensive players.

We all agree that Greg's 8' shot is horrible, but I'm saying he didn't seem to make half of his 3'-5' shots. That makes Steve's 40% from 3 a much better option.

 

Frankly, I believe in my heart that the Brandon iso oriented offense has to change if this team is going to take a step up to the next level. Secondly, if Andre Miller was here he'd be the third option on offense behind Brandon and LaMarcus, and since he's a good distributor and would be setting the table for others off the drive that's exactly what you want out of a starting point guard -- to be able to get his if needed, but to focus on trying to get the primary scorers going.

Finally, my comment about people being defensive wasn't only targeted at you, but it was this comment by you that sure made it seem like you were being defensive about Ben Golliver's take on Blake

Did you really think the critique he gave was some kind of smear job or character assassination? It was certainly brutal and didn't hold back, but I didn't read it as a hatchet job.

 

After the shot? I would expect that to be the case if they were even half-way decent at boxing out, before the shot there's no way to generalize what the defense looked like for an entire season. But, if memory serves Steve took a helluva lot of corner threes off of kick-outs from Brandon driving into the lane.

Well that's the funny thing about things that "seem" to be a certain way, when "in fact" he made 59% of his shots in the immediate basket area (which accounted for 90% of his total shots attempted).

Here's one way to think about it.
Player A:
shoots 40% from three and generates 1.2 points per shot attempt, put that together with a 2.3% draw foul rate (which is for all shots that player took and is probably close to nil on three pointers since most teams avoid fouling three point shooters like the plague)

Player B:
shoots 60% from the immediate basket area and generates 1.2 points per shot attempt, but because he's got a draw foul rate of 22.7% he's going to be getting a decent number of 'and-one' attempts and free trips to the charity stripe.

Which would you rather have as the primary offensive weapon? That's what Ben was talking about in his critique.