B-Roy unhappy? (MERGED)

Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by Fez Hammersticks, Nov 10, 2009.

  1. noknobs

    noknobs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    4,912
    Likes Received:
    6,300
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I highly doubt Roy is unhappy. If I hadn't come by this sensitive melodramatic message board I wouldn't even be aware that this was an issue at all. I haven't seen it. A single tweet from some dick-weed and everyone goes crazy...

    Given how close Roy and McMillan are, and how Roy is basically the Medium between Nate and the team, I find it extremely difficult to believe that Roy is against this starting lineup or this new running philosophy. If he was, I don't think McMillan would do it. Roy can feel uncomfortable in it at first, but that's quite different from being upset or unhappy.
     
  2. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Differnce of opinion, I don't buy that Blake is an albatross.

    Raelly why would Nate play Blake or start Blake if he hurts the team? Blake has one more year on his contract, is not a high paid player and accepts a role off the bench . . . Nate has no reason to start Blake unless he thinks it helps the team.

    My opinion is Blake does more than shoot three pointers. He knows the offense, spaces out well, hits some two point shots, keeps the ball moving. He knows the team, his teammates and how to play with them.

    Starting or coming off the bench (really what is the difference when bench players often get more minutes than starters) . . . Blake helps the team and is an asset.
     
  3. Ed O

    Ed O Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    10,701
    Likes Received:
    2,826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    He plays him because he's mistaken. He plays him because he's a "safe" play and because his natural tendency has been to play low-risk, low-reward basketball.

    Yeah... I don't see that. I don't think that he makes any of his teammates better at either end of the floor, with the possible exception of Roy offensively because he stays out of his way.

    Starters guard other starters. Bench players play against bench players. Blake is better than many of the guys on NBA teams' benches but not as good as most of the starting PGs. That's why it matters whether he's starting or not.

    Ed O.
     
  4. Ed O

    Ed O Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    10,701
    Likes Received:
    2,826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    I know you're kidding, but it's more than semantics. Miller is guarding a 2, Roy is guarding a 3. Why? Because Blake is in the lineup.

    Put Webster out there and suddenly you have all of the players defending their natural positions, instead of only three.

    Ed O.
     
  5. Rastapopoulos

    Rastapopoulos Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    42,023
    Likes Received:
    26,358
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Ballin'
    Miller SHOULD be guarding a 2. He hasn't the footspeed to handle ones any more. Same with Jason Kidd. Meanwhile Miller is perfectly strong enough to handle 2s. He'll have problems with tall 2Gs who are good shooters, but we'll cross that bridge...

    Do you know who one of the best defensive centers in the league is? Answer: Chuck Hayes. How much does he give up to everyone he guards? More than Blake. And a lot of SFs count on getting past their man and aren't any good at posting up. Blake would be better at guarding them than Webster.

    Remember Utah with Hornacek? They did okay.
     
  6. BLAZINGGIANTS

    BLAZINGGIANTS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2008
    Messages:
    22,030
    Likes Received:
    14,606
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fuck. We gave Roy a huge fucking extension. If he ain't happy, he shoulda thought of that before signing on the dotted line. Has this been 3 years of fools' gold? Suck it up and tough it out, bitch.
     
  7. PapaG

    PapaG Banned User BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,870
    Likes Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tualatin, OR
    And there you have it.
     
  8. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Well what do posters think of Roy's body language . . . I didn't see any problems.

    Roy did an interview after the game . . . anything revealing there?

    I did catch a funny stare by Fernandez on the bench. He doesn't look happy, but it was just a quick glance of Fernandez and who knows what he was thinking about at that precise moment.
     
  9. Ed O

    Ed O Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    10,701
    Likes Received:
    2,826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    No way. A player who's 5 inches taller than Blake will be able to either post him up or shoot right over him. I don't think that pointing to ONE player that can guard much taller players is a good argument why Steve Blake, of all people, would be able to do it, too.

    Hornacek was a shooting guard, as you know, with Benoit and then Russell as the small forward at the 3 spot. He was about Blake's size, but he was never strong defensively and he was a MUCH better shooter than Blake so his offense made up for his defensive shortcomings...

    Ed O.
     

Share This Page