Biggest concern, PG or SF

Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by Magnum, Sep 18, 2008.

  1. BLAZER PROPHET

    BLAZER PROPHET Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    18,725
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    dental malpractice claims adjuster
    Location:
    Portland area
    I agree. So the question now is how well they can do 1-3.
     
  2. Reep

    Reep Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,545
    Likes Received:
    3,569
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    South Jordan, UT
    We'll find out in about three weeks. My guess is 2-3 will be solid, but 1 will be lacking.
     
  3. Tortimer

    Tortimer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Messages:
    2,861
    Likes Received:
    72
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Seaside, Oregon
    Welcome to S2 1 Eye Jack.
     
  4. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I think so too.

    But I like Blake more that the general consensus from posters. He has good basketball IQ and he knows his role. I wish he was a little stronger and quicker, but he has some intagibles that makes him a decent PG at thsi level. . . and maybe on this team that is all you need????
     
  5. Natebishop3

    Natebishop3 Don't tread on me!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    92,781
    Likes Received:
    55,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    I don't think PG is a need for this team. I was tempted at the idea of getting a Kirk Hinrich, but with so many players capable of handling the duties, I'm not really concerned. At any point during a game you could see Bayless, Roy, Rudy, or Blake running the point. I wouldn't feel uncomfortable with any of them.

    Small forward is a little iffy though. Webster has his good nights, but he also can disappear for stretches. Outlaw was far more consistent than Webster, but he's streaky too. I would love for Batum to be the kind of SF we need. Defensive minded, rebounder, with a decent offensive game. Basically I would love to have a Shawn Marion type player. The athleticism is nice, but not necessarily the most important factor. I think a high basketball IQ would be really important.
     
  6. Reep

    Reep Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,545
    Likes Received:
    3,569
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    South Jordan, UT
    I never really liked Steve Kerr, John Paxson or Fish as point guards. But, but how many rings do they have? I think Blake is better than all three of them.
     
  7. Natebishop3

    Natebishop3 Don't tread on me!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    92,781
    Likes Received:
    55,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Fisher continually proved me wrong. I hated that guy when he was playing for the Shaq/Kobe Lakers. He's a really good player though. I think he's slipped in the last couple years a lot, but he was a key factor in those championship teams.
     
  8. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It's those kind of players mentioned above that I think have the intangibles. They have a feel for the flow of the game, they know when to get certain players involved, when to step aside, when to push the action and when to step up and make shot.

    They aren't the best athletes or best players on the court, but they understand how to get the the team going.
     
  9. Magnum

    Magnum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    New York
    For those advocating a "we're already set" strategy, who is the starter at PG and SF? The fact that there isn't a clear answer is a big problem imo as it will inevitably lead to lineup changes, distractions, and 2nd guessing of Nate both by fans and potentially in the locker room. Such a situation is more likely if we get off to a slow start, but it's a distinct possibility.

    Role players, guys who aren't stars but clearcut starters are useful. I don't see us having any of those yet (Bowen, Battier, etc).
     
  10. Minstrel

    Minstrel Top Of The Pops Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    26,226
    Likes Received:
    14,407
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    User Interface Designer
    Location:
    Hello darkness, my old friend
    Small forward is the far bigger concern for me.

    I don't think Portland needs a "pure" point guard. With a future guard rotation of Roy, Bayless and Fernandez, you'll always have two good passers with court awareness in the backcourt. Roy will guide the team most of the time, but both guards will be able to create for others.

    At small forward, we currently have two options: a below-average player in Webster and a slightly above-average player in Outlaw who derives most of his value from taking the ball and going one-on-one. So, neither makes a good fit as a starter for a championship-caliber team.

    I'd like an average to above average player. Defense is at the top of the ideal skillset of this player, for me, but after that, some package of passing, outside shooting and rebounding would be great.

    Josh Childress is the ideal player who could be available for Portland. With luck, Atlanta can be induced to deal his rights to Portland for some combination of LaFrentz, Webster, Outlaw.
     
  11. 1 Eye Jack

    1 Eye Jack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,219
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Vice President for Display company
    Location:
    Albany, Oregon
    I agree I like Childress although Grainger or Prince would be my first choice.
     
  12. Minstrel

    Minstrel Top Of The Pops Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    26,226
    Likes Received:
    14,407
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    User Interface Designer
    Location:
    Hello darkness, my old friend
    I'd love Granger. In fact, I'd be ecstatic if Portland got him without giving up any of the big three. But all indications are that Indiana plans to do whatever it takes to lock him long-term. And even they can't for some strange reason, he won't be a UFA until the 2010 off-season, by which point Portland won't have cap space.
     
  13. Diana Prince

    Diana Prince Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
    I think our biggest need is SF. We seem to have enough PG's who can all do specific things. The one thing the team is lacking is a lock down defender on the perimeter.
     
  14. THE HCP

    THE HCP NorthEastPortland'sFinest

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    70,045
    Likes Received:
    58,028
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    N.E.P.
    He isn't our PG? Really. He can't drive the lane? Wow, I swore I saw him take it to the rack on every defender that tried to guard him last season. He may not be a stereotypical PG in the sense that he isn't 6'2. But he runs this teams offense, and there is no denying that! The only thing he does NOT do is guard the other teams PG.
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2008

Share This Page