How Much Risk with Ramon Sessions?

I think Sessions is going to be something special but I do worry about his 3pt shot quite a bit. If he had that he would potentially go to the top of my list of "reasonable to get" guys. Mike Conley Jr. is tops right now because I think he is likely available and the Oden connection can't be underestimated. I would definitely go Outlaw, Blake and Frye for him. Maybe get a decent few picks in return or future first rounders.

 

thats exactly my athletic experience. To me it seemed like it would take a year or so for the subconscious mind to wrap itself around a new technique to the point it became 2nd nature... the key was not to get frustrated with the short term failures and have confidence that the light at the end of the tunnel was coming so stay positive and keep working.

STOMP

 

I agree and if Conley is available I would try to trade for him before signing Sessions.

 

Why can't Oden develop a connection with Sessions, who is easily a better passer than Conley?

 

I'm not sure the exact reason. I could come up with as many guesses as you though. My best guess is that Skiles prefers to rely on experience. He seems like an old-school kinda guy that feels there's a rite of passage for a young player.

Other ideas:

- increasing the trade value of Ridnour
- wanting to develop Sessions off the bench
- wanting to keep Sessions' value low

I don't think that's true. He has a major weakeness, and it's not his jumpers. It's his long range jumpers. Rajon Rondo and Chris Paul come to mind. Their outside shot has been a weakness for awhile. Paul is getting better. Most players do. Sessions will also I predict. But, that one aspect of his game doesn't diminish his stellar playmaking skills, ability to get into the paint, and his defense.

Does it matter. You view him as an ordinary point guard. What I would spend on him would be outrageously retarded to you, right? I'm not trying to sound cold, I just think it's a waste of both of our time to go into that.

I'd hold on to Blake until I've acquired Sessions, that's for sure. If we could sign Sessions and Milwaukee doesn't match, I would look to move Blake in a package for either a 3, 4, or young players to store in Europe or at the end of the bench. Bayless would remain in the same role he's being anointed to.

Bayless will do just fine as a shooter. His stats support that at Arizona. His stats from last year, with the tadpole role he was faced with, are near meaningless to me.

 

That's not true, a poor outside shot significantly hurts your ability to get into the paint, and consequently your playmaking. Obviously, there are plenty of good players (Rondo) who are still effective without, but if you sign Sessions to a long term deal, you are hoping that his outside shot improves at least a little bit.

 

Well I don't think there is anything preventing that. On the other hand just as Sessions needs to develop a mid to long range shot that is consistent Bayless needs to gain passing skills. I mean heck why not assume that Bayless will both improve his passing and also develop chemistry with Oden since they have the workout pact this summer?

My point is we know with MCJ that you are getting long standing chemistry that comes from years and years of playing with Oden and being his BFF. You get a decent to good passer, a decent defender and a good to excellent 3pt shooter right now. I mean that's what it comes down to. All three of these guys Bayless, Conley and Sessions have enormous upside. Two of them have proven NBA skills (Conley and Sessions) and one of them has proven chemistry with Oden. Frankly, Bayless has the highest upside to me of the three if he can regain his college shooting #'s and hone his passing skills. His height, raw athleticism, speed and chiseled physique are all superior to Conley and Sessions and whats more he is the lowest risk highest reward as we don't have to give up any assets to get him and his salary is extremely low compared to Conley or what it would take to sign Sessions.

If we want to go with what is proven I think Conley is the best fit because his assist numbers are decent, his penetration is excellent and he can hit the 3. As an added bonus you get the chemistry with Oden and the locker room presence of a good friend for Oden who will look for him in the offense and knows his sweet spots.

When all is said and done if we just develop Bayless I wont' be too sad because I'm a big believer in the kid and think he could be perfect. If I want a sure thing though I try and trade for Conley. I only go after Sessions if I'm not sold on Bayless and I can't get Conley.

 

It didn't hurt Tony Parker, Chris Paul, Rajon Rondo, Andre Miller, or Jason Kidd. And it's not hurting Sessions either. Ramon Sessions is displaying consistent star-like qualities like each of these players.

 

But that's already "built in" as a disadvantage. He currently struggles to shoot from distance and currently is good at getting into the paint and distributing. Maybe he'd be even better at penetrating if he could shoot but his current penetration ability, as handicapped by his inability to shoot, is already very good.

 

My point was that since Sessions is the best passer among the three (Bayless, Conley, Sessions), he'd be the best fit with Oden. It doesn't really matter if Conley is Oden's bff, on the court Sessions presumably has a skillset that will help Oden the best. I didn't see the two of them use their chemistry to execute the pick and roll at Ohio State, they were just two talented players.

The other positive with Sessions is that he is a free agent, so the Blazers can keep Bayless. Getting Conley might be tricky, and would probably involve losing Bayless. With Sessions, I think the best Milwaukee could hope for in a S&T is future picks, the rights to Freeland, and Sergio.

 

It does hurt them, they're just good enough in other areas to compensate. Is Sessions a world class finisher like Parker? Is he the best PG of his generation like Paul? Does he have a killer wingspan (as well as Garnett, Allen, and Pierce) like Rondo? etc... If you give him a contract with something like: $5m, $6m, $10m, $10m, by those last two years you're really hoping he explodes like Devin Harris. Which, for me, would probably necessitate an improvement in his shooting.
For the record, I'd be all for that bet, and Sessions is one of my #1 targets this summer. I just disagree with the idea that his poor outside shot doesn't hurt his game.

I agree, but like I said above, in the later years of his contract, his shooting will need to improve for him to be worth the money.

 

But that's what I was trying to say. Maybe not very well though. Obviously he would be a better all-around player if he shot from distance better, but that one fault of his doesn't diminish that he is excellent with his other qualities. Does that make sense?

 

I'm not against getting Sessions. I think you are gambling about the outside shooting getting better. I also disagree about the importance and impact of chemistry. Sergio and Rudy come to mind. There is no way they are able to pull off those kind of plays without chemistry. There is no question that Outlaw, Martell and Roy have the raw athleticism to pull of an alley oop, it's just that Sergio and them don't have the timing down. Likewise Conley has instant recognition of Oden's sweet spots and how to throw him the lob. Yes Sessions might be easier to get that doesn't mean he is the best choice. I wouldn't give up Bayless for Conley but would want to keep both and let them battle it out. All of these PG rotations assume Blake is gone so you can include him in any offers to the Bucks or Memphis. Also Frye can be added to the spare parts heap with Freeland and Sergio.

Do you think we can really keep Bayless, Sessions/Conley, Roy and Rudy all happy and getting their minutes? We have to at least get rid of Blake to make it workable at all and probably get rid of Outlaw to be able to justify sliding Roy to the 3. We have some significant log jams at 1 thru 3 that need to be resolved especially if we are adding a Conley or Sessions...

I'm all for getting rid of Blake and Outlaw by the way, we need to move beyond the training wheels era. If we don't add another PG then you can deal Sergio and keep Blake and Bayless.

 

All the players you listed shot at least 10% higher from 3pt land than Sessions did last year. Some shot closer to 20% higher than Sessions, that's a considerable difference. Teams don't leave Chris Paul or Tony Parker wide open for jumpers because they would pay for it.

The reason I asked about what you were willing to pay is because it would give me an idea for just how good you think he is. If you were willing to give him all 8 million, that tells me you think extremely high of him and would expect him to be our starting PG for a long time. If you weren't willing to go over the 5-6 million dollar range, I would assume you think his upside is worth the risk, but you aren't completely sold he's the answer.

 

I listed those players because they all have at some point in their careers, mostly early, struggled with shooting long range. Pointing this out would hopefully provide some semblance of evidence that players do improve in this area and/or find ways to still contribute at a high level despite it. That's all. And by the way, if I remember correctly teams did stay off Parker at the beginning of his career. They were daring him to take the shot.

Second, it's not really fair to compare last years numbers for the players I listed. Each of those players are at different stages, ages. A more eye-opening comparison would be what their shooting percentages were at the same age.

As for the amount of the contract, it would be above the mid-level exception for sure. How much more? That's a good question. There are other teams that will be able to pay him the same. Only Atlanta, I believe, would be the real threat though. They're a Playoff team with a possible starting position at the 1. The other teams are not as set up as Portland and Atlanta for immediate success. The other factor, how far under the salary cap we get. If we're $7M under, I'd use all of that for sure. I'd attempt to sign him for four seasons and not five. The first year would have to be at the mid-level exception. Until we know for sure what the salary cap is we won't know what that is, but for the sake of this discussion, let's say $5.5M. I believe the 2nd year's max increase is 8%, so, rounding up, $6M. The 3rd year is where our cap space comes in. The 3rd and 4th years would be at $8M each.

Would I go higher? Fuck yeah. I don't think we'd have to, but I would. It's possible we could have as much as $10M in cap room. I would not go that high, not with 3rd and 4th years at $14M each.

Let's just say, I see an All-Star point guard in the making. I would pay him accordingly. Max amount in the 4th year would be $9.5 before I'd walk away.

 

since Portland looks like they'll be over the cap those last two hypothetical years with or without Sessions on the books, is this really something worth considering? I'm sure PA would like to see a return such an investment, but from a practical standpoint of where their salary cap situation would sit, a contract like you're siting would only push them further into the lux tax... thats it.

STOMP

 

if he doesn't work out, a contract like that would make him virtually untradeable, potentially a problem in the locker room, etc. It's still probably worth it, but the risk deserves consideration, not even Paul Allen has infinite money.

 

What if Roy doesn't work out after he gets his expected extention???

any signing is a risk, especially to us fans (like me) who have next to zero clue of a guy's personal makeup.

STOMP