Jake Layman

[Five Second Violation]

As I understand it, today was the deadline to clear his salary before it becomes guaranteed for the 2018-19 season.

There may be a few more hours so we may hear differently, but with no news yet I take it as a sign that our front office is now planning on keeping his $1.5 million on the books for next year.

This a player who has shot 29% from the field to this point in his career and, to put it nicely, resembles a deer in headlights most of the time he is on the floor.

Beyond his raw physical frame, can anyone explain the logic of keeping Layman on an NBA roster?

 

[santeesioux]

We may never know since Woj has bigger fish to fry and Quick and Freeman are on vacation.

 

[riverman]

resembles a deer in headlights most of the time he is on the floor.

I don't see this at all...he plays well, just hasn't been able to shoot to his abilities...that's also considering he barely gets to break a sweat on the court...he plays decent defense...rebounds ok...not afraid of contact....CJ rode the bench his first two seasons...at his price they must think he's ready in his 3rd year to make the leap...his shot form is great. Meyers will need a buddy at the end of the bench anyway

 

[BBert]

In case his salary is needed for a trade is one potential reason.

 

[Five Second Violation]

I don't see this at all...he plays well, just hasn't been able to shoot to his abilities...that's also considering he barely gets to break a sweat on the court...he plays decent defense...rebounds ok...not afraid of contact....CJ rode the bench his first two seasons...at his price they must think he's ready in his 3rd year to make the leap...his shot form is great. Meyers will need a buddy at the end of the bench anyway

I think he's been stupefyingly bad at most every facet of the game in the minutes that I've watched. Bad shot selection, low basketball IQ, panicked defense, no handles.

I think he had one fluky good game his rookie season against the Warriors and one fluky good game this past season in that garbage time comeback against Houston. Otherwise he has looked out of his depth in nearly every minute that I've observed.

CJ and Layman aren't remotely comparable.

 

[BonesJones]

As I understand it, today was the deadline to clear his salary before it becomes guaranteed for the 2018-19 season.

There may be a few more hours so we may hear differently, but with no news yet I take it as a sign that our front office is now planning on keeping his $1.5 million on the books for next year.

This a player who has shot 29% from the field to this point in his career and, to put it nicely, resembles a deer in headlights most of the time he is on the floor.

Beyond his raw physical frame, can anyone explain the logic of keeping Layman on an NBA roster?

His salarybcould be needed to match incoming salary in a trade. We don't have any small contracts other than his and Swanigans.

 

[Five Second Violation]

In case his salary is needed for a trade is one potential reason.

I'd rather see an open roster spot. I don't see his fairly minuscule salary being a meaningful filler in a trade and he almost certainly has zero trade value on his own.

 

[Five Second Violation]

His salarybcould be needed to match incoming salary in a trade. We don't have any small contracts other than his and Swanigans.

Well we also have Trent, Simons, Collins, Papagiannis, Baldwin, and then the TPE. All of which probably hold a little more trade value than Layman.

 

[BonesJones]

Well we also have Trent, Simons, Collins, Papagiannis, Baldwin, and then the TPE. All of which probably hold a little more trade value than Layman.

But Simons and Trent don't count as outgoing salary until 3p days after the sign. I'm talking about salary for matching purposes.

 

[Five Second Violation]

But Simons and Trent don't count as outgoing salary until 3p days after the sign. I'm talking about salary for matching purposes.

Yes, in the short term their role as trade assets is limited (just draft rights at this point) but by August that would't be an issue. Of course by that point the Crabbe TPE will be kaput.

 

[BonesJones]

Yes, in the short term their role as trade assets is nonexistent but by August that would't be an issue. Of course by that point the Crabbe TPE will be kaput.

We don't want to have to include a rookie to match salary because we didn't guarantee Layman's contract...

We could take the $1.5M hit down the line and waive him.

 

[Five Second Violation]

We don't want to have to include a rookie to match salary because we didn't guarantee Layman's contract...

We could take the $1.5M hit down the line and waive him.

Rookies get traded all the time. If it helped us get a good player, I'd be down.

I just think it's a needless risk to keep salary on the books for a guy who we pretty much know isn't worth a roster spot and who you're apparently just hoping to trade anyways. We would have been better off just extending the QO to Pat, since it was virtually the same amount of money and there's at least a sliver of a chance that someone else might want him down the line.

 

[tester551]

I think he's been stupefyingly bad at most every facet of the game in the minutes that I've watched. Bad shot selection, low basketball IQ, panicked defense, no handles.

I think he had one fluky good game his rookie season against the Warriors and one fluky good game this past season in that garbage time comeback against Houston. Otherwise he has looked out of his depth in nearly every minute that I've observed.

CJ and Layman aren't remotely comparable.

Exactly. Completely agree. But Riverman tends to be a NO apologist.

We don't want to have to include a rookie to match salary because we didn't guarantee Layman's contract...

We could take the $1.5M hit down the line and waive him.

That makes no sense. The $1.5m cap hit turns into a $4.5m cap hit just for the *possibility* of including him in a trade (that is not going to happen).

 

[Scalma]

Didn’t want to start a new thread so I just bumped this one.

Layman so far this season

14.9 PER
.575 % FG
.438% 3PT
126 ORTG (third on team behind Lillard and Collins)


per/36 numbers:

13.4 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 1.2 spg.

I can go on, he’s graded out favorably in most categories. The point I’m making isn’t even necessarily that he should play more (although he should) but that when he’s on the court, he should be used more. He has a skill set we could take advantage of. He moves REALLY well off the ball. Remember when Nurk would often hook up with Harkless on backdoor cuts? Could easily run that with Layman as well, but I’ve literally never seen it attempted, not once.

The starters seem to run the same two, three plays, and largely just ignore Layman. Even Aminus looks are mostly just set threes or broken play drives. It’s cool now during the regular season, but in the playoffs we need to be more diverse. We need to start leaning on our role players more, and Layman is one example. They’re not rookies anymore, put some trust in them.

 

[BonesJones]

Didn’t want to start a new thread so I just bumped this one.

Layman so far this season

14.9 PER
.575 % FG
.438% 3PT
126 ORTG (third on team behind Lillard and Collins)


per/36 numbers:

13.4 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 1.2 spg.

I can go on, he’s graded out favorably in most categories. The point I’m making isn’t even necessarily that he should play more (although he should) but that when he’s on the court, he should be used more. He has a skill set we could take advantage of. He moves REALLY well off the ball. Remember when Nurk would often hook up with Harkless on backdoor cuts? Could easily run that with Layman as well, but I’ve literally never seen it attempted, not once.

The starters seem to run the same two, three plays, and largely just ignore Layman. Even Aminus looks are mostly just set threes or broken play drives. It’s cool now during the regular season, but in the playoffs we need to be more diverse. We need to start leaning on our role players more, and Layman is one example. They’re not rookies anymore, put some trust in them.

I talked about this in the Mailbag that I'm in the process of uploading, and in previous videos. I don't understand why we don't use a Layman/Collins frontcourt off the bench instead of resorting to Meyers and Swanigan. Especially against a smaller, quicker team like the Lakers.

 

[Scalma]

I talked about this in the Mailbag that I'm in the process of uploading, and in previous videos. I don't understand why we don't use a Layman/Collins frontcourt off the bench instead of resorting to Meyers and Swanigan. Especially against a smaller, quicker team like the Lakers.

Or the starting lineup bang bang.

 

[JDC]

I talked about this in the Mailbag that I'm in the process of uploading, and in previous videos. I don't understand why we don't use a Layman/Collins frontcourt off the bench instead of resorting to Meyers and Swanigan. Especially against a smaller, quicker team like the Lakers.

Layman just doesn't have the length, strength or general defensive acumen to play 4. He's not strong on the boards either which is an important skill for a small ball 4 playing next to Collins.

More Aminu/Collins is what I'd like to see in these situations.

 

[Scalma]

Layman just doesn't have the length, strength or general defensive acumen to play 4. He's not strong on the boards either which is an important skill for a small ball 4 playing next to Collins.

More Aminu/Collins is what I'd like to see in these situations.

You seen some of the guys that play the 4 these days?

 

[JDC]

You seen some of the guys that play the 4 these days?

Yeah, and they'd still destroy Jake.

And it's not like the offense is getting a huge boost either. Layman is a very limited ball handler / scorer on the move / playmaker.

 

[Scalma]

Yeah, and they'd still destroy Jake.

Jake was playing the four with the second unit last night. His rebounding has improved. He’s put on muscle. I don’t think anyone is saying start him at the four, but I don’t see why he couldn’t play it with the second unit.

 

[jlprk]

Blazer coaches have turned Layman into a supersized SG. He'd be lost at PF unless they coached him into it for a couple of years. Until then, he'd look like Early Meyers Leonard.

 

[JDC]

Jake was playing the four with the second unit last night. His rebounding has improved. He’s put on muscle. I don’t think anyone is saying start him at the four, but I don’t see why he couldn’t play it with the second unit.

He can, but you're going to struggle to defend or rebound in most cases.

**Small sample size alert**

In 33 possessions, Layman at the 4 has surrendered a 150 offensive rating and a 57.1 oreb%

 

[rotary111]

So 10 games in Jake is out?

Tough crowd.

He's improved and the team trusts him. He is better on the offensive side of the ball at this point, give it time he will get better with more minutes.
He makes quick cuts to the hoop and is finishing around the rim better than he was even a few games ago.... He's learning and adjusting his game.
That shot is really nice it will start falling for him soon but in the mean time he can keep moving without the ball and making hustle plays.

 

[swish3]

In the Nov 1 Pelicans game, Jake was 3 of 3 swish3s. In the Bucks game playing Jake, Zach, and Meyers could result in strong swish3 scoring and an important bench boost toward the 130+ points that will probably be needed to win.

The Blazers will need to increase swish3 shooting to beat the Bucks. I imagine a Blazer win with 18 of 45 swish3 shooting.

 

[Scalma]

In the Nov 1 Pelicans game, Jake was 3 of 3 swish3s. In the Bucks game playing Jake, Zach, and Meyers could result in strong swish3 scoring and an important bench boost toward the 130+ points that will probably be needed to win.

The Blazers will need to increase swish3 shooting to beat the Bucks. I imagine a Blazer win with 18 of 45 swish3 shooting.

4am? Is Meyers an early riser?

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Counterpoint: Layman should play LESS, and is only playing at all because we need a stopgap in the starting unit and Gary Trent isn't ready.
I expect Layman's minutes to go down as the season goes on, ESPECIALLY if Harkless's knee ever gets better.

The person whose numbers SHOULD go up (and will) is Curry. I say again: look at what happened when Curry was the fifth starter in that one preseason game. It was an offensive explosion.

I know that Jake's numbers look good and Curry's numbers look poor, but Curry leads the WHOLE TEAM in +/- per 48, whereas Jake is the ONLY starter in the negative. (Cue complaints about +/- stats. But remember, Jake is playing WITH strong +/- guys like CJ and Dame, so think how bad his numbers would be otherwise.)

Oh, and Stauskas is in the -ve too, which is why I don't want him starting even though he's taller than Curry. Curry is our mini-Kyle Korver - another guy who was a perennial +/- king despite only being good at shooting, because of his effect on opposing defenses.

 

[riverman]

Jake is playing really well for a guy getting spot minutes even if he's starting...he's going to be a solid rotation guy and like Crabbe, Barton, CJ, Pat C.....his 3rd year is showing the work he's put in. I like Jake. I also like Nik a lot...Curry seems to be playing catchup in Stotts system but has a good motor. After 15 more games we'll have a clear picture of who's a rotation guy. I don't even put Mo in the conversation at this point. When he can play two games in a row I'll weigh in on him

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Counterpoint: Layman should play LESS, and is only playing at all because we need a stopgap in the starting unit and Gary Trent isn't ready.
I expect Layman's minutes to go down as the season goes on, ESPECIALLY if Harkless's knee ever gets better.

The person whose numbers SHOULD go up (and will) is Curry. I say again: look at what happened when Curry was the fifth starter in that one preseason game. It was an offensive explosion.

I know that Jake's numbers look good and Curry's numbers look poor, but Curry leads the WHOLE TEAM in +/- per 48, whereas Jake is the ONLY starter in the negative. (Cue complaints about +/- stats. But remember, Jake is playing WITH strong +/- guys like CJ and Dame, so think how bad his numbers would be otherwise.)

Oh, and Stauskas is in the -ve too, which is why I don't want him starting even though he's taller than Curry. Curry is our mini-Kyle Korver - another guy who was a perennial +/- king despite only being good at shooting, because of his effect on opposing defenses.

Jake often plays in garbage time with the scrubby scrubs, so his +/- is ridiculously skewed.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/laymaja01/lineups/2019#all_lineups-5-man

 

[riverman]

Jake often plays in garbage time with the scrubby scrubs, so his +/- is ridiculously skewed.

Jake is also trying to focus on his defense more than look for his shot..he's talked about it...he'll be a good role player down the road

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Counterpoint: Layman should play LESS, and is only playing at all because we need a stopgap in the starting unit and Gary Trent isn't ready.
I expect Layman's minutes to go down as the season goes on, ESPECIALLY if Harkless's knee ever gets better.

The person whose numbers SHOULD go up (and will) is Curry. I say again: look at what happened when Curry was the fifth starter in that one preseason game. It was an offensive explosion.

I know that Jake's numbers look good and Curry's numbers look poor, but Curry leads the WHOLE TEAM in +/- per 48, whereas Jake is the ONLY starter in the negative. (Cue complaints about +/- stats. But remember, Jake is playing WITH strong +/- guys like CJ and Dame, so think how bad his numbers would be otherwise.)

Oh, and Stauskas is in the -ve too, which is why I don't want him starting even though he's taller than Curry. Curry is our mini-Kyle Korver - another guy who was a perennial +/- king despite only being good at shooting, because of his effect on opposing defenses.

Really interesting to look at Curry's lineup splits.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/curryse01/lineups/2019

they do show that in the time he's played essentially in Layman's spot, that lineup has performed well.

I also see several Curry/Stauskas/Turner/Collins lineups: With Biggie--bad; with Moe--bad; with Chief--bad. But those 4 with either Meyers or Jake have been successful.

I know this is all situational and small-sample-size theater, but I find it fascinating.