besides the win IMO was that Nate was letting Andre call plays and LEAD the team. That IMO is HUGE and could be a sign that Nate is going to finally loosen up the reins enough to make a difference. I gave you significant crap recently Nate but I will also give you some credit for finally loosening up - now lets have that continue! Nice win!
I agree, but don't forget Oden icing both free throws down the stretch. Aside from too much Blake and not enough Webster I thought it was a fantastic game!
A few times you could see Miller telling guys where to go and where not to go. A vet floor general out there. Well played game.
Sad as it might be to admit, Blake is just a significantly better basketball player than Webster. Scary, but undeniable.
Are we talking about NBA 2K10 ratings or something? There is no question in my mind that Webster helps this team more right now then Blake. Webster has been a huge plus everytime he is on the floor this season. Blake has had maybe one good game. Blake must have turned 5 fast breaks into set plays last night.
So are you saying the Blake can do just as good a job defending Carmelo Anthony and Kevin Durant as Webster did? If not, then what does it matter who is "better" in some statistical model. We have NOBODY that for long stretches can check high scoring wings other than Webster right now. Might as well keep Webster in the lineup and in the flow so we don't mess up something we need badly. Blake, on the other hand, doesn't bring an important element to the team that another player can't provide. Rudy & Webster can shoot the long ball. Miller, Roy and Rudy can run plays and pass. Webster needs to start and Blake needs to go the bench.
The problem with this argument is that you are thinking about defense about the big, strong 3s and ignore the defense against the quick 1s. Our options for guarding the 1s, when Nic is out, are Blake, Miller and JB. Miller seems slower than Blake on these guys at this point - and JB is just raw. So it's Blake or JB - does not seem strange to me to have Blake in there.
The fallacy of this argument is the assumption that Blake is even a passable defender at the 1 spot. He is not.
He did the best job on Parker last night. If he is not a passable defender but all the others you have are atrocious - he gets the job by default, I think.
Small (very, very small) sample size. Blake was a bad defender last season. What has changed? Next argument.
No next argument, it's the same one we had before... First of all - he played hurt for most of the year - his pre-season conditioning set shows that he is much quicker this year, so he might be a little better there, but... The only next argument I have is your very own argument - what changed from last year? Did we get a defensive stopper against quick point-guards? No. Did Bayless progress to the point where he can be counted on to play long minutes? Early signs are encouraging in spot-minutes - but I am not certain he can really be "the" answer for periods of time. So, again, what changed? Nothing. Blake is not a good defensive player - but he seems like the best option we have at this point against them. Maybe, just maybe - the 3 guard line where Miller was doing most of the heavy lifting on offense had Blake able to concentrate more on his defense - and that's why Parker was actually not able to shake him off without a pick. Again, in 11 minutes - Parker was 1-4 from the field - his only field goal coming when Miller was covering him and he got a quick first step against him. You are telling me we need Webster in there - but you did not tell me who will be able to stay somewhat in front of the quicker guards? It's not Webster, that's for sure.
Actually I like having Webster coming off the bench. Call me crazy, but I think our second unit lacks more D than O. Having Webster man the defense on the second unit really helps with the others to concentrate more on scoring.
