Blake's 71.4 win percentage leads team.

Check again. Brooks had a great Game 1, no argument there. But then Blake got better. In game 2, Brooks hit most of his shots at the end of the game when the Blazers already had the victory sealed.

THEN- Check out Games 3, 4, & 5. Blake shut Brooks down. Brooks shot 10 of 36 from the field in those three games. That's 28% shooting. (Meanwhile, Blake shot 49% from the field including 42% from the three point line).

Blake got better as the series went on. Torched? Hardly.

 

This is Travis' 7th year. And you can't argue that we are better without him. Travis is the answer to both of our weaknesses. SF and back up PF. Are you happier with Cunningham and Howard? I'm not.

 

Do you think we can win a championship with Blake at the point, with the way he is playing this year?

 

EVEN WORSE!!!

 

I just wish Blake would stop holding himself back. He could be an All-Star

 

NO, it doesn't mean that at all. You guys just don't understand. There are so many freaking factors to look at. It could mean Roy and LMA just have more of an opportunity to fail against opponents' runs...they get tired more and start to play lazy defense...Roy is forced to handle the ball more, which takes him out of his element (the 2 guard spot). This last one could also could be supported by his great increase in turnovers this year...trying to do too much.

Could also just amplify the supposed clash between Roy and Miller's playing styles.

If anything, the win % stats here show how Roy and LMA play better with Blake, because they have more freedom to operate the way they are used to...not directly because of Blake, THERES NO WAY TO PROVE IT.

 

the team front page at 82games factors their version of PER, oppenent PER at players position while they are in the game, and +/- all into one rating -

http://www.82games.com/0910/0910POR.HTM

 

Yes.

 

Someone said Brooks torched Blake. 28% shooting in three games is hardly "torching." I never said Blake should be an All Star but he plays a very important role on our team.

 

Exactly.

 

I wish I could find the interview from about 2.5 years ago when Blake talked about having to adjust his game to play with Roy, that he wasn't getting to play point guard the way he was used to.

 

This is true. It's just kind of funny how we're probably the only team in the league who plays better with a PG that does almost nothing production wise.

What if its just purely a chemistry thing though? Give Miller or Bayless, or pretty much ANYONE
the same chance, and after enough time has passed that new combo could easily outperform what we have going right now. I think this is a likely explanation.

 

91 posts arguing stats that like all stats can me manipulated many ways as they are subject to interpretation. I use MY EYES and Blake is not very good and should be relegated to backup duty, it is really not that hard to figure out.

 

For the record, it's not so much that I LOVE Blake so much as that I can't stand the HATE for Blake.

 

I agree. What I watch during the games, is a PG that disappears, and sometimes shows up to hit a 3.

If anything why cant we just move Roy to PG, and put Bayless in as the 2.

I mean, hell shouldn't we want production out of our PG?

 

The year Blake was in Denver, he lead that team in win% as well, playing next to AI and Melo.

 

Do you watch that even when Blake isn't hitting threes, he is spreading the floor so that Roy can operate? Something that neither Miller or Bayless can do as well as Blake?

 

And his assists were up since he was playing in a different system.