When your ball-dominant player (Roy, Wade, Kobe) is at the top of his game, then maybe it's tolerable that it is not very interesting to watch and that other players are not able to develop their games. However with Roy not at the top of his game, it is a joy to watch others use their skills and polish those skills within a team framework. I should add that it also allows these other players to build their confidence. Of course it was three games at home against not very strong opponents, but we played without any inside defensive presence that might help us get some easy fast break points, but still we won and we won with entertaining, flowing basketball. Obviously Aldridge and Rudy have been the two big beneficiaries; Aldridge able to show how well he can catch the ball on the move and go to the basket, Rudy able to show his playmaking skills. Again, against inferior opponents but they are only beginning to learn to play with each other; they can become more polished, they can improve their timing if allowed to keep doing this. Miller has also been able to fully demonstrate his PG skills. The coaches have to find a way to allow this development to continue. As some have suggested the best idea seems to be for Roy to play off the bench for 20 minutes a game; maybe Mathews can always play with Roy, he seems to be our most reliable three point shooter. (I would like to see Matthews play 40 minutes a game so he could play plenty of time with the first unit also.)
Team oriented offense vs superstar-centric offense. When you don't have a superstar.....why would it even be a debate? Winning ugly with Roy ISOs as the featured offense is no longer a realistic scenario.
Trading Andre is the smart thing to do for the franchise itself, but it's not going to help the team this season though. And if they trade Andre AND build around Roy, then they are making a huge mistake.
But why? Barely beating the T-Wolves and Warriors at home? What about that says we are better without Roy? For the record I don't necessarily disagree with you, just wondering how you came to the answer
Better ball movement where whole TEAM is involved, better defense, more guys contributing at both ends of the court, and we run more when we have the chance. LMA appears to be more energized but even with him as more of a focal point it's within a "team offense", not ISO Roy. If the diminished Roy can adjust and maybe play off the bench that could work. Obviously I'd like to see these guys get a chance against better teams and see how they perform.
I wasn't saying you were, furthermore I think the team refuses to not feature him, AND I think they will never simply stop playing him. I personally feel that the team is better without Roy at this juncture, that doesn't mean the team or the FO agrees with me. He's the "face of the franchise" and their only All-Star player. Whether he is hurting the team or not, he will be in the lineup. I'm merely saying that I think the team, and more specifically Aldridge, are playing better ball without Roy. I'm sorry I even mentioned the record, because I think the record without Roy is irrelevant. You only have to watch the team and how they're playing while Roy is off the active roster to realize that they are playing better without him. They're having more fun. It really makes you wonder if Roy hasn't turned into a cancer in the locker room.
Should we come up with the list of teams we've lost to WITH Roy? I haven't made up my mind about whether or not we are better with Roy, but using the schedule as proof either way isn't all the compelling.
The sample size is too small without Roy, and I agree with others that the competition has been pretty poor. The Bucks are a mediocre team, and GS and MN are praying to be mediocre by the end of the year. I think that Roy, even in a limited capacity, is capable of helping the team. Hopefully he learns how to be an improved Quentin Richardson (to use his comparison) rather than trying to be a poor man's Wade. Ed O.
I think some of you are thinking of Roy strictly from a talent standpoint, and yes he can help this team despite his limitations from a talent perspective, but I'm looking at him from a mental standpoint. I don't think Roy is mentally capable of helping the team right now. His head isn't in the right place. Mental supersedes talent on the basketball court.
I'm not a mindreader. I look at what a player does, not at what he thinks he should do or what I think he thinks he wants to do. Ed O.
This. I think the real question is whether the Blazers are playing better because they're playing more up-tempo and involving more players than they were earlier in the season. I think the answer to that question is definitely yes. The only way they regress when Brandon comes back, IMO, is if they revert to the old style of play. Based on quotes from Nate and Aldridge after last night's game, I don't think that's going to happen.
Right now his mental game may not be where it needs to be, but that could easily change. And again it may take a year but if the talent is still there then I think we may need to give it some time. Because i doubt we will get what we want in a trade.
You don't need to be a mind reader. Look at what he's saying to the media and how he's carrying himself on the floor.
I would love to see Brandon accept a new reality and contribute to the team. It was only a week or two ago that Brandon was still talking about how the Blazers didn't have the proper personnel around him to maximize his play. Hopefully the time off has been good for Brandon in more ways than one and he can find a way to fit in. I like that Nate said flat out after last night's game that the team is going to stick to what they've been doing and they are going to continue going through Aldridge. To me it was a clear message to 'everyone' that Roy is no longer calling the shots and that the team and offense are no longer contructed around him.
If Aldridge can continue to put up numbers like that, there would be no reason whatsoever to go away from what we've been doing.
I'll tell you this much: the team is a fuck of a lot more fun to watch without Roy. And, as others have mentioned, Aldridge's and Rudy's games have just exploded. In fact, I'd like to focus on Rudy: he has literally never played better. Sure, he LOOKED better with Sergio, but that was the two-headed Spanish Armada being judged. He was just ooping pinpoint-perfect passes delivered by Sergio. He never penetrated, because he never had to - that was Sergio's job. But now: now he's actually attacking off the dribble!! And against supposedly good defenses like the Bucks! And he's looking good! And he had the first non-assisted, non-transition dunk I have EVER seen from him! And it was set up because the last two times he'd driven into the paint he'd thrown that patented lob to LaMarcus. So the D sagged back to block Aldridge's path to the basket and Rudy waltzed down the middle for an uncontested two-hand dunk. It was SWEET. And it was also something we hadn't seen - well, ever. So, put me down for a "yes." And put me down for "do this trade please."
