You got a lot of great takes here, and I respect that, but yes I honestly think the first line up plays better team defense than the second one. What you say sounds good on paper, but based on what I have been seeing from Webster lately, I would not be playing him large minutes. And if they are so undersized and not the best defesive unit, why does this team lead the league in points allowed?
I never once said Blake cost us the game. You must have me confused with someone else. +/- is a team stat. Using it to evaluate single player/single game performance is misusing the stat. BNM
Simple - pace. We are 28th of 30 in pace. We give up fewer points becuiase we play the game at a snail's pace. I frankly don't have a problem with that - just providing an anser to your question. Also, until recently we were rated 1st in team defensive effeciency. We are now ranked 2nd and falling. Our defense has suffered since Nate made the switch to the 3 guard line-up. In addition to our defense suffereing with the 3 guard line-up, so is our rebounding - which WAS one of our biggest strengths. BNM
I agree about the rebounding and the part I dislike about the 3 guard line up the most. But I'll take 2nd in the league in defensive efficiency . . . got to expect it is going to drop a little when Miller was inserted into the starting line up . . . seriously second is great for an undersized team . . . it's great for any team. I think the issue is that this team is loaded with 1 & 2 and very weak at the SF position. Roy, Miller, Blake and Rudy is where the current talent is. Nate is in a tough spot, play Roy (your superstar) out of position to allow Blake in there to keep the offensive flow and the team defense or gamble with Webster in hopes he learns how to contribute on a consistent basis. Blake's talent is that he is a gym rat and knows how to help a team on the court. he plays unselfish and knows how to get his shots within the scheme of the offense. I don't think he is the best athlete on the team (one of the worst), but he is a gamer who know what it takes to get a win (isn't always able to execute it, but knows what to do). BTW-I was never big on Miller, and as much as I appreciate Blake gym rat game, I now appreciate what a true NBA vet PG (even being past his prime) brings to the game . . . and I'll admit Miller is more effective with his NBA savy PG skills than Blake is with his gym rat skills. So I'm not hugely in to Blake, just think he contributes a lot more than posters (and that stupid PERS ) gives him credit for.
I think I understand the Blake hate. Steve is NOT an athletic freak of nature - he is an "average Joe" who somehow made it through hard work, high basketball IQ, and perhaps a bit of luck. And, I think that pisses a lot of people off; especially those "average Joe's" who didn't make it - some of whom might be on this board. I've been watching Blake since he played at UMD, where the same type of haters were there as well. They simply could not accept the fact that someone seemly as average as Blake can succeed in a sport made for those who can make high-flying dunks, score like crazy, etc. This is the same conundrum fans have tried to solve whilst he won in high school, etc. Blake has not only won with, but has STARTED on teams that have won championships at every level, except the NBA - and that can still happen. In fact, if this team does win the championship with Blake, he'll probably be even more vilified. Blake reminds me of a commercial about a product that doesn't claim to do anything; it claims to make everything else BETTER. Basketball is lot more complex than the fantasy crowds are willing to acknowledge and that is what I like about it. The fact that someone as seemingly insignificant as Steve Blake can thrive in this league is why I'm a big fan of both the NBA and the confounding Blake.
Actually, it doesn't. It's gone down since Nate went with the 3 guard line-up (we we're first by a wide margein, we are now 2nd and slipping). Of course, that's not entirely Blakes fault - he was also a starter when we led the league in defensive efficiency. The problem is with Blake AND Miller both starttng it forces two of our starters to play out of position on defense. It forces Roy to guard bigger, stronger small forwards and forces one of Blake or Miller (usually) to guard the other team's SG. This simply doesn't work. If one of Blake or Miller was exceptionally fast/quick, it would force a mismatch on the other end - but it doesn't. There isn't a SG in the league that can't stay in front of Steve Blake. So, not really Blake's fault, but having him as part of the 3 guard line-up does hurt our defense - and with the way he's shooting the ball this season (0.363 FG%), it's also hurting our offense. BNM
Where do you get these numbers? They most certainly do not match the numbers I have been tracking. I have been following it on Hollinger's team stats. We were 10th at the start of the year, around 7th best when the switch happened, we are 2nd best now.
Uh oh....Experiment failed! Reverted to the old SN and talking shit to other poster! Welcome back prick! Your other personality was nice while it lasted
