All he said was he could help. And he was a starter towards the end of the season. Does him then being a starter somehow make a difference in that statement?
You think we would have won with Bayless. Therefor you thought he was the missing piece. Carry on sandwich man, carry on.
I never said the Blazers would have won with Bayless. Carry on, hired security guard. You should start charging me rent for my living in your head.
So when Love came off the bench for Minnesota last season, he was someone who wouldn't have helped another team either? Or does the good stats on a bad team only work subjectively?
Jefferson played most of his time at C. He was benched so they could start Darko? Ryan Hollins? Gomes? Gotcha. Works subjectively. When it's a guy you fawn over, the team's record is irrelevant. When it's someone else, he's just a guy who puts up stats on a bad team.
Bayless has one skill that appears to be well above-average: the ability to get to the free throw line. If he can do that at a high level and be merely competent at running a team and playing defense, he'll be an above-average player. If he can maintain that ability in the playoffs, he will be a very valuable player. I don't think there's much question that he could have helped this series. Patty Mills only played five minutes, but the team got nothing from him in that time, and Bayless would probably have been more effective. The Bayless trade is still one that I consider to be bad. He didn't have the year that I expected him to have, but I think that being traded twice during the season can have a dampening effect. And he's still only 22 years old. Ed O.
