Blazers sold on Bayless as PG of the future

You're selecting a few of the greatest floor leaders of all-time. No one is saying Bayless is or will have the almost preternatural ability to sense where the ball should go. But those aren't the only players who can be point guards. Using an analogy, the greatest chess masters in the world may have an innate and unusual pattern-matching ability perfectly tuned for chess (which they have to refine with lots and lots of playing). But even people without that can become great chess players, deriving a high-level pattern-matching ability from lots of work and experience.

So, sure, Bayless may never appear to make magical passes, but if he can draw defenders and find open teammates, he can be a very successful point guard for this team. Roy has plenty of play-making ability too, so Bayless doesn't have to be one of the great play-makers in the league. If he can hit shots when playing off the ball and drive-and-dish when he's playing on the ball, he'll be a great complement to Roy.

Remember, Bayless was a point guard in high school and recruited to Arizona as a point guard. He played shooting guard at Arizona due to injury to their planned shooting guard. He has played the role and was expected to at a high level. I think there's good reason that the Blazers have confidence in him to be their point guard of the future.

 

The BIG difference is we now have Kevin Pritchard running things. If you remember, he was yelling for Chris Paul. I think I trust his eye for talent.

 

Great points. So while Bayless may never have "it" the way some of our past point guard stars have, he still can be a high-level point guard. I'm down with that.

 

You all know that in JJ's worst year (last year in Portland) - his TOV% was better (lower) than Sergio's best year, right?

If you actually look at their career tov% - JJ at 17.7 is high - but is not that far away from Steve Blake (16.5). To be honest, however, Steve was fantastic protecting the ball last year at 13.6 - but JJ had his best year protecting the ball at IND as well - and at 16% - he was actually acceptable...

Just imagine how good we would have looked last year if our backup PG had a 16% TOV% instead of the 24.7% we got from Sergio... That is, right there, probably another win or 2, a first round meeting with the hobbling Spurs instead of the Rockets and a 2nd round meeting with Denver...

For the record - Bayless had a miserable year protecting the ball last year as well - and at 19.3% was pretty bad as well - but still, better than the "born to be PG" Sergio ever did in his career...

 

Exactly. All of the draft chatter at draftexpress.com and from Chad Ford seems to suggest they are trying to get out.

 

Last I heard, drafting rookies was the only option!

We desperately need experience, but that will come through a deal of some sort. (trade, S&T) I suppose it is *possible* that the pick could be part of that deal - but I doubt it. The question then becomes how you get max value out of the pick.

 

It was never about the ammount of TO's for me, but with Jack he always seemed to turn the ball over at the worst possible time. Blake seems to do that as well, only not as bad.

 

Ah, I see. Perception vs. Reality. Fair enough.

 

Yeah, Jack's turnovers weren't risky passes, but total unforced brain farts.

 

If you include missed FTs in the last 5 minutes of games, which are a turnover in everything but name, it is very close.

 

Well, except during the expansion draft. Then you are free to take old, overpriced guys their current teams no long want.

BNM

 

Bayless/Blake for Nash
Outlaw/? for Jennings (at 7, 9, 10, or 11)

I like that a lot!

 

Steve Nash? Fucking please......that guy is toasted and over the hill.

 

I see Bayless as a Tony Parker type player. Parker wasn't a great distributor when he first started. Tony Parker is effective because he's so damn good at getting in the lane. Getting into the lane put's ton of pressure on the defense and when teams start to collapse on him he has an easy dump pass or kick out to a 3 point shooter. No one can question Bayless's ability to penetrate and more importantly finish. This kid will have no problem learning how to distribute the ball and set up the offense. More than anything he just needs more playing time to gain confidence.

 

Don't want him either, but amazingly, he's not toasted. Dude is still very much one of the better point guards in the league.

 

We don't want Jennings, he's super turnover prone and cocky...Poor sport as well! He is exciting to watch and flashy but he doesn't fit our style or needs.

 

What did Jennings do to be called a poor sport? I haven't heard anything about that.

 

I'm not convinced that the Blazers are sold on Bayless as PG of the future. I am sure they have hopes he could be the PG of the future and they are doing whatever they can to facilitate his development. But I think the logical thing to do in this PG top heavy draft is try to trade up for the guy they think has the most potential.

Unless they think somebody like Ramon Sessions (who maybe is the only available good young PG in the league) has more potential than anyone in the draft.

So I guess what I am saying is that PG is an important position and we are weak there and so we need to pursue every option for improving there. Developing Bayless is only one part of the strategy.

 

http://sportstwo.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142452

 

That doesn't make him a poor sport at all.