Well he has a below average offensive rating for a catch and shoot player (check out James Jones this season http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jonesja02.html), and he's a bad defender. The Lakers are quite talented and deep in the frontcourt, so they overcame these deficiencies in the past couple of seasons. Phil is playing him based on sentimental value, what he remembers from the Shaq three-peat.
Hahahahah. I told my Laker fan co-workers that I awaited the day that Steve Blake would choke away a game or two for them. I just hope it is in the playoffs.
Three times a day? Come on now, you're more rational than the above post. I've stated repeatedly that I would prefer LMA over Kevin Love on my team, yet their PERs would suggest otherwise.
Last post-season? Yes he was better than in 2009, when he was pretty awful. Yet had his worst Defensive rating of his post-season career. The Lakers talented frontcourt bailed him out.
OT but I think my favorite statistic this year is that James Jones has been astd on 100% of all his shots this year. That's just amazing. Sign me up to play with LeBron and Wade.
James Jones is a great dude, he likes drawing charges as well. He's the best player so far outside of King/Wade/Bosh. http://www.82games.com/1011/1011MIA.HTM
How do you explain his sub-12 PER last year, then? The dude is just not a good NBA player. Fisher's PER has been terrible, also, but that's because HE'S not good... and he's 36. Blake is 30 and doesn't have old age as an excuse. Regarding the PG in the triangle generally: can you point to a team that had a good player at the PG spot but had his PER suppressed? Ron Harper was entering his 30's when he joined the Bulls and saw his PER drop substantially (although it was always significantly better than Blake's and Fisher's). Ed O.
Since PER seems to be the focus, can I at least point out that BLANKY had the same PER (15.0) in the Houston playoff series that Andre Miller had against Phoenix? Can I also point out that Houston was a much better defensive team then Phoenix? Based on PER alone, it could be said that Miller was a downgrade from BLANKY in terms of playoff PG performance, since Miller's average PER was against one of the lesser defensive teams in the NBA.
Well, I do, since the playoffs matter much more to me than the regular season. BLANKY elevated his game in the playoffs for the Blazers; Miller wilted and then basically disappeared after one big game, culminating with a GameScore of -0.4 in the deciding Game 6.
So you're giving more emphasis to a less meaningful statistical sample? That's not very logical. Didn't you say that they produced similarly? One "elevated his game" and one "wilted"... and yet they ended up in the same place. That would seem to indicate Miller's a far superior player most of the time in your opinion. Ed O.
The supposed better player, who is making more money, had a worse playoff than the guy dubbed BLANKY. I guess beating Milwaukee on a December night is fun to watch, but when the better player was asked to elevate his game, he instead regressed from his regular season form. Also, the supposed better player was the starting PG on a team that won 4 less games than the supposed lesser player.
The better player was focused on by the opposing Phoenix defense after he destroyed them in game 1. The lesser player was largely ignored because the opposing Houston defense was worrying about Roy destroying them. Had Miller been playing with a healthy Roy, the Suns would have been fucked, because they couldn't have focused on him. Context does matter.
I know, it's crazy. Clearly, the 2008-09 Blazers won more games than the 2009-10 Blazers. I'm not even sure why this is up for debate. The team won more games with BLANKY as the starting PG, even if he is a lesser player.
I'm not sure about that. I remember plenty of posters stating after Game One that the team was better without Roy.
Well that makes one of you. There is not a single executive in this league who would argue for Blake over Miller and you know it.
