Outside of Roy and Miller (and with Miller being limited in what he can do), nobody else on the team could consistently create their own offense. I saw in another thread where Cho wants "speed, size, and depth". Bayless gave him 2 out of those 3, and he basically wasn't replaced with anything other than a draft pick this year (Portland could have used their own pick for Gerald Wallace). Complaining about depth after trading your back-up PG for nothing seems a bit foolish, IMO. Having a bench player who can create offense isn't easy to find, and after watching Jason Terry pull shots out of his ass off of the dribble, I couldn't help but see what Bayless could be off of the bench. I didn't like the Bayless trade when it happened, and after watching the offense mostly sputter for 6 games, I dislike it even more after the season.
I still think it was a great move. Guard depth wasn't (isn't?) our problem...we have Miller, Roy, Rudy, Wesley who need minutes, and J-Bay is, if I'm being charitable, 4th on that list. having a first-rounder is much better trade ammo then a backup hybrid guard, no matter what the upside. You may be right that we could've used our own pick this year and had Bayless in this series and no pick in the upcoming draft, but what makes you compare Bayless (an average backup at best) to Terry, who's basically a perennial 6thMoY candidate? I don't think that you can say "Terry pulls shots out of his ass of the dribble, we should've had Bayless" any more than you can say "Dirk hits midrange jumpers, we should have had Juwan Howard or Dante in there."
I didn't like the move either, but Bayless hasn't exactly been setting the league on fire with his new teams. But yes, our bench is pathetic.
Bayless can create his own shot, though. I'll take a 14-15 PER off of the bench if it means that I don't have to watch Rudy, Batum, and Roy stand around on offense.
Rudy, Batum and Roy all had 13-15 PERs this year also, but didn't show up (except for Roy's 4th). Aside from a few inspired stretches, Bayless on the Blazers was a stand-around-and-wait guy, also. I can see your logic that Bayless might've helped, if we kept Roy or Rudy on the bench more. But I think there's also a case to be made that he would've been almost as ineffective as any of those guys, except that we'd also have no draft pick this summer.
Roy and Bayless would have been nice together off of the bench, with both being able to create off of the bounce. Rudy was just lost out there, and I think he just wants to go back to Europe at this point. If depth was a problem, which it was, then trading a young hybrid guard who can create his own shot seems like a bad move, and Cho does need to get somebody else who can create offense outside of Roy.
Again, I don't think that guard depth was a problem at all. You'd almost have a better point if you said we should've kept Dante, because we had one real PF and one real C on the roster. Granting that Bayless is better than Patty, how many minutes did the 5th guard play this series? Very few outside of crunch time. The 4th guard, Rudy, played only 13 mpg at a crappy 7 PER. Even if Bayless would've taken ALL of Patty and Rudy's minutes, we're talking less than 15 a game, and only when it's with Roy--so Bayless would be at best the 3rd or 4th option on offense.
I assume you watched the games, and saw the striking difference between having players who can create offense (Dirk and Terry) versus having one injured guy who does it off of the bench (Roy). Dante wouldn't have made a difference, IMO. The offense seemed to struggle to score the entire series. It was almost painful to watch. When a Roy ISO is the most consistent play, you know it's time to find some more varied options on offense. Nate showed he will give playing time based on who is hot, and he did it this series. I guess I don't see why having another scoring option for a team that can't score consistently isn't a good idea.
Maybe Elliot Williams was the guy were missing. Chances are he'd play better defense than Bayless at least.
Could be. I always forget about Williams. Hopefully he's a nice surprise next fall. A taller and more lengthy version of Bayless wouldn't be bad at all off of the bench, plus he's supposed to be a good on-ball defender.
Bayless's defense isn't bad, he's good at pressuring and he's fast. He just sometimes gets ahead of himself and fouls alot. He's also a better ball handler than all of our guards except Roy and Miller. You also saw how much we struggled to set up the offense with Roy at point instead of Miller.
Just being adequate is enough. And I think you would agree that his contributions on offense would have made up for his deficiencies on defense.
Yeah, that's why I started this thread. I could see Bayless in a Vinny Johnson/Leandro Barbosa role at some point, if he (and his coach) just accept that he is a smaller SG, and not a larger PG. I think he would have helped against Dallas. He had a decent series against PHX last year off of the bench.
Bayless average 17 points, 7.4 assists and 4 rebounds per game as a starer with the Raps. Hes also shot 50% and 35% from 3. I think he just needs a defined role off of the bench for a decent team. I don't think he will ever be the starting PG on a title-contending team. Still, he had a PER near 17 as a starter, which isn't bad for a hybrid guard.
The notion that a reserve on one of the worst teams in the league was our missing piece is kind of silly to me.
Our issue was an inability to hit jump shots, which caused Dallas to pack the paint. Bayless would have found a very crowded painted area, and been unable to operate. Maybe he would have made a difference, but someone finding a jump shot would have helped way more.
