Well that definitly is an option as well. Let's put it this way. When we traded for Andre Miller, I knew what we were getting, and I knew there were holes in his game. If I was running the show, I would have made Roy the PG a long time ago, and given him Rudy at SG to work with. SF by committee at this point. That is a back court I can see winning a championship.
Isn't it in your best interest for Portland to suck? In all fairness Fisher did have a horrible series. However, Fisher has a track record of getting it done when it counts just has he did last year. Blake has no such history in the playoffs. Also the Lakers play a system that doesn't really utilize the point guard position the same way as most teams do. Teams like Portland. In this case Fisher < Blake. Jackson >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nate.
I was long against that, but at this point, it's starting to make sense to me. I was worried then about who would guard opposing PGs. Neither Miller nor BLANKY is doing the job now, so Nate may as well try and go big. That said, I think it does dull the impact that Rudy has when he comes in off of the bench.
If I were in charge the starting unit would be: Roy Rudy <small forward who can handle the ball and create> LMA Oden Who was the point and who was the 2 would depend on the possession. Further, with a small forward who can handle the ball you have a third player who can initiate offense. I would not have signed Miller. I would not have resigned Blake. I would have done my best to get the small forward above. It doesn't have to be an all-star, but they do need skills that our current crop of uninjured small forwards completely lack. They are out there ready to be had.
When you are running a defense that switches everything on the perimeter, I don't really see much of a downside to it. Portland runs the same defense now Seattle did when Nate was there. They switch everything, so you don't have to chase little guys through screens. Then when you consider the damage Orlando did against teams in the playoffs with the big perimeter players, it kind of starts to make sense.
If Outlaw was still available, I'd be advocating inserting Rudy/Webster into the line-up. The problem for me is that w/out Outlaw, Rudy's ability to create for himself and others is needed with that unit. I know everybody hates the guy, but losing Outlaw takes some of these options away from Nate.
That is where I think we are missing out on the ability of one of our other younger players. Too long now people have been asking to mold Bayless into a PG, when he is not. But the guy can score, and score a lot quick. I would use him like Detroit used the Vinny "The Microwave" Johnson back in the bad boy days. I also would not platoon sub like Nate does. In fact, I would go so far to have a star player on the floor at all times unless the Blazers had put the game totally out of reach.
I'm guessing we'll be seeing more of Bayless in a "Microwave" role as the season progresses. That's a great "role" model for Bayless to be shaped into. He's basically unguardable when he wants to be.
Except that Blake isn't playing like Blake of last year. He's playing much worse. If you expect Blake to return to form, why wouldn't you expect the same of Miller? Miller has been superior to Blake both historically and this season. There's not much argument for Blake being an equal or better player.
There's a decent argument to be made for Blake being better for this team as a starting PG. That has no bearing on who would win a game of 1 on 1.
Well, I'm talking about the better player in team basketball, since Miller's greatest strength through his career has been his passing. I have no idea how good Miller is in one-on-one tourneys. I think there's a decent argument to be made that Blake is better for exactly the system that the Blazers used last year. I think, though, that the resolution should be to configure the offense to run differently to better use the different mix of personnel that they have now. It's not about "building around Miller" but rather about the duty of a coach to consistently make adjustments for changing personnel. Miller isn't the only change. Oden's role is going to slowly expand, Batum and Outlaw are gone (Batum since the start of the season) and Webster is available. Things can never remain exactly the same, all of life is transitory.
Well I dont care if POR sucks or not, just as they dont bounce the Lakers out of the playoffs The Lakers won 4 playoff series last year IN SPITE of Fisher...I appreciate his career of work for the Lakers but 2 hail mary 3's dont cover up how bad he was...it wass quite amazing how bad he was. You're right about the PG position being far less significant in the triangle offense but its not like POR recent rise to respectability is from supirior play from the PG position. As far as people saying last year Blake had a career year...yeah that true but if you look at his career progression that was the third year he was getting starter minutes (DEN, POR, POR) and every year he improved...odds are he improves this year or at least levels off at last years production if he was still getting starter minutes and didnt have to look behind (or ahead) of his shoulder
Fisher still brings decent defense to the table. Blake, eh.... I could live with Blake if he was a better defender. He's just not, though. And he has a knack for really choking.
ROFL ROFL ROFL Please dear god tell me you are kidding. He can play halfway decent team defense....as in when he get burned EVERY time he at least makes them drive towards Bynum and Pau. I know Fisher is trying as hard as he can but he just cant keep up with todays PG's. All he is good for on D is taking a charge every 2 to 3 games. See Aaron Brooks just got his career high off him a few nights ago?
Fisher's Drtg is 1 point higher than Blake's right now. Plus, Fisher's career high in PER is 14.8. Last year, as the PG for the NBA champion, he had a PER of 12.1, with an Ortg of 117 (1 point lower than Blake), and a Drtg of 108), the same as Blake. Blake has a PER of 14.4, for the sake of comparison. DaRizzle, since I don't visit Laker boards, are Laker fans starting thread after thread about how much of a disaster Fisher is on the team?
No, but some (as in people who have no influence)are thinking about moving him to the bench to reduce his minutes. He has been great the last two years for the first half of the season and then burns out. The Lakers have invested so much in other players that its accepted that not every position is gonna be top caliber talent....just most of them
Derek Fisher is a much better man to man defender. That formula that takes all kinds of things into consideration which can directly effect one's defensive rating. It's a stat to look at, but not a be all, end all stat.
And you are basing this off of? From what DaRizzle said, it seems like Fisher has the same problems Blake does.
Based on what? Aaron Brooks crushing Fisher in the playoffs last year, and Aaron Brooks crushing Fisher this year? Brooks played much better against Fisher than he did Blake in the playoffs last season. Blazer fans don't want to admit it, but once again, the actual statistics don't lie.
Not really. FG% was pretty much the same. Sorry. I never said Fisher was a great man to man defender, I said he was better than Blake. Big difference. The example you provided was not only wrong, it's hardly a big enough sample size.
