I was reading a thread over at Lakers ground, and it actually looks like we stack up pretty favorably with a lot of the leagues backcourts, with Roy, Miller, Rudy, Blake, and even though he wont sniff the court.. Bayless. Where would you guys rank us?
It's tough; a Kobe/Can of Hamms lineup still has Kobe in it. Likewise, any lineup with CP3 has CP3 in it... those guys are stellar, and by themselves lift a back court pairing up a notch or two. But Roy/Miller is pretty damn sweet, and a Blake/Rudy backup is even better when compared to a lot of benches in the NBA.
Yeah, after those two, I think it's wide open. It'll depend on how Andre makes Roy better (resting on the court, better passes help defense, etc), but I'd place us between 3rd and 5th right now. Hell, even with Blake in there, we were a top 10 back-court because of Roy. The Roy/Bottle of Henry's back court.
Really? CP3 and Mo Peterson is better than Brandon Roy and Andre Miller? I'm not buying that. CP3 and Roy are comparable players but the distance between Dre and Mo Pete is huge.
Paul and Kobe are better than Roy, but not by enough that it makes no difference who their backcourt partners are. I'd take a Roy/Miller backcourt over Kobe/Fisher or Paul/Peterson or Paul/Posey. I think Parker/Ginobili might be superior. It's at least comparable.
I think that Paul is significantly better than Roy, but I agree that Miller is mo' better than Mo Pete, so I'd prefer the Blazers' back court. Ed O.
I think it depends on what you are looking at with the Spurs, if its a healthy Manu then maybe. But Roy > Parker, and last year Miller > Manu.
Yeah, I edited my post to say "at least comparable." Not sure that San Antonio's backcourt is better, but there's an argument to be made there.
Offensively we're up there with anyone. Defensively, we're below average, maybe even among the worst. I hope Roy will step up his D this year. I would also trade Bayless for a rich man's Dahntay Jones, but I don't know who it would be.
Our defensive efficiency rating was 13th/30 last year. Certainly room for improvement but far from among the worst. And there were only 3 teams last year that gave up less PPG than the PTB (I know you have to factor in pace) It's not like we were the Sac Kings defensively - just below average for a playoff team.
Truth of the matter is most teams in the NBA have pretty bad defenses, just because we were above the median didn't make ours good.
I don't agree with that at all. I think Miller is markedly better. He was much, much better in his prime and, even though he's lost a step from his prime, remains better. He's smarter, has better defensive instincts and is stronger (which doesn't help him with waterbugs, but does with bigger guards).
I don't understand this. How can most teams be "pretty bad"? To what are you comparing defenses if not to one another? Ed O.
It's like Churchill once said: "Democracy is a terrible form of government. It's just better than all the other forms."
