IQ

There are tons of good players in the NBA, but I think the more structured the game, especially on defense, the more important bball IQ becomes. A fast running team might need a good smart PG, but the rest of the team can rely more on athleticism. A slower more plodding team, like the Blazers, needs all 5 players to have a higher bball IQ than normal.

Camby, by all accounts is a very high IQ player, and that is what helps make him so valuable on the Blazers. Outlaw, a tremendous athlete with a good stroke, often caused more problems than he solved. I like Outlaw, but I think we can agree he is not a high IQ player. I think this is why Nate relied so heavily on Blake. His IQ helped make up for some deficiencies elsewhere.

I think that one big reason why our rookies Dante and Jeff were as useful as they were in this injury laden season, is that they are high IQ players. Batum is the perfect mix of high IQ and terrific athlete. Miller is an average athlete but has a tremendous bball IQ.

Of course we want great athletes on our team, but I think as the Blazers put together next years roster, they should put a very high premium on IQ. draft or trade for smart players as the primary criteria, especially as role players. Let the great but dumb athletes go to other teams and keep this squad in the mold of the yesterspurs.

 

Was looking for a place to put this, and your thread popped up, so I think I'll put it here. There was discussion in the Camby thread about bringing Outlaw back, and different offseason moves. I think a solid 3/4 with a good basketball IQ to go after would be Josh Childress. I dunno if, if they lose Johnson, Atlanta would be mroe likely to match an offer for Childress, but I'd explore a MLE type offer for him as a backup 3.4 in Outlaw's role. Maybe he would just duplicate what Webster provides us, and isn't a great signing, but would love to entertain bringin ghim in. I think we have a lot of assets at our disposal this offseason to really build to a solid championship contender next season.

 

I'd much rather have Childress than Outlaw, but I don't know if he's possible to get. Atlanta almost surely would match, so a trade would have to be worked out. Honestly, if giving them Rudy could get that done, I'd do it.

Childress is a very good defender, a high-efficiency though non-volume scorer, solid rebounder and a generally smart player. He's basically Batum minus the high upside. That would be a great bench addition.

Outlaw just struck me as a decent acquisition that the team could get within the MLE, a guy who'd upgrade the bench.

 

I would think they'd be likely to match, although I wonder what their offseason plans are. When Joe Johnson opts out, they'll have roughly 9 million in cap space. Childress' hold will be 10 million, so if they can not re-sign Johnson, and want to grab someone else, they'd need to waive their rights. Who knows.

Or, we make a move like you mentioned, a S&T of Rudy for Childress as a portion of the MLE, or most of it.

 

RR7, it was the same thread that got me thinking about IQ. did or did I not want to bring back Outlaw. I think this needs another player that can score in bunches off the bench, but I just don't think Outlaw is that guy. Why, his bball IQ.

I like the idea of Childress, who I would fully trust on defense and as a low volume scorer. But I wouldn't mind finding someone who is perhaps less of a defender but has great handles and can force his defender to play up on him by being more of a scoring threat than Childress. I don't really have a good option in mind yet.

 

I think Bayless could be that guy off the bench for us next season. I also think it's important for Nate to not try his bullshit two unit appraoch next season, but if we can focus on Bayless being the scoring 1/2 off the bench, add someone like Hinrich(for Joel) to play alongside him in the backcourt, with Childress, Cunningham, Camby? Or Webster in place of Cunningham, etc. Hinrich and Childress could create for themselves if need be, but Bayless would be your attacking instant offense off the bench, with shooters and defenders around him.

 

This is why I wanted to leave a roster spot open this year. Milwaukee picked up Stackhouse as a reserve and he played very well for them. Every year there are veterans available who can make a difference for a team if put in the right situation. Stackhouse for instance, is obviously not Stack of old. But he is a guy who is putting down 8 points game off the bench, every night like a machine. 8 pts here, 10 pts there, pretty soon you have a bench unit you can count on for 30 points a game. It just takes a few stable players with a good basketball IQ.

 

Somebody mentioned Ray Allen in another thread. His game has really fallen off, but he could still be a great smart vet with a great three point shot to have as a backup if we wind up dealing Fernandez somewhere.

 

Yea I had been talking with Little Alex about that, he brought up Ray Allen. The guy is probably going to be a free agent. He is the leading 3 point shooter of all time I believe. He is familiar with Nates system. He will be looking to win. The question is, does he buy in?

 

I think with our roster at the beginning of last season, no, he doesn't buy in. I think with Miller aboard, and re-signing Camby, he just might. He can probably get mroe money in boston, buthe has to recognize that team is done.

 

Boston tried to deal him several times during the season. I think their days together are probably over.

 

Would Ray be willing to play 15-20 mpg which would be about what he could expect if Roy is healthy. He would bu Roy and play a tad alongside Roy when Roy moves to SF.

 

I think if we got someone like Ray Allen, he'd be our backup 2-3. So he'd get 10-15 anight backing up Roy, and another 10 or so playing alongside Roy with Batum on the bench. It'd keep him fresher than the 35 a night he's playing now, for sure.

 

Outlaw's pretty skinny as well. As a top of the key and out player, which is where Outlaw was, he'd be fine. Not asking him to bang with many guys, just play in a smaller lineup.

 

As everyone knows, basketball IQ is learned, while IQ is innate. Basketball IQ comes from experience, coaching, and (sometimes, but not usually) innate trends (e.g. Sergio's court vision breaking down the opponent's defense, Batum's interest in studying tapes of opponents).

When I advocate more experience, I am thinking of the basketball IQ that derives from it. I am also thinking of players who have learned more than one coach's system. For example, if Player A has played under McMillan for his entire 4 year career, he doesn't have the basketball IQ of Player B, for whom McMillan is his 3rd NBA coach in his 4 years. Length of career is less important than variety of experiences.

It's similar to someone who has the same job for 30 years (and is unemployable outside his industry), compared to someone who has worked only 10-15 years, but has moved around and learned many skills. Each looks down his nose at the other.

Many players with high basketball IQ got good coaching (e.g. Michael Jordan got the best at both the college and pro levels--Dean Smith, Doug Collins, Phil Jackson). Good coaching can partially make up for a lack of innate abilities (see Outlaw and Bayless). Real IQ can partially make up for it, too (Chris Dudley went to Yale and survived in the NBA by learning defense from a great center coach, Bill Fitch in New Jersey, and sharing time with Sam Bowie).

 

With the additions of Camby, Cunningham and Pendergraph, I don't think we need him to bu PF

 

I'm not sure how valuable Chill would be with Nic presumably soaking up 35 minutes a night at the 3 and Brandon 37 at the two, but if he could be satisfied with a sixth man role (basically what he did in ATL) then I'd love to add him to this team, but with the ten million he's making tax free in Greece for at least another year, it seems like the price (and role) would have to be right for him to give that up and come back stateside ... it seems far more likely he'd sign an offer sheet with one of the teams with capspace for above the MLE (something like 8 million a year) and dare the Hawks to match, or maybe some kind of sign and trade could be worked out -- but I doubt we'd have the ammo to get him in that situation.

 

He's making less than 10 million there. I also can't see any team offering someone who hasn't played here in two years 8 million a year.