Anyways this thread is getting derailed. At what point is Stotts forced to start Layman? Are we close?
Terry seems hellbent on starting Harkless for some reason. Unless there's an injury or trade, I don't think Jake will start anytime soon. At least he's leapfrogged Stauskas in the rotation, which is a start.
I guess the best case scenario is what’s been mentioned by others; he doesn’t start but he’s in the closing lineup in the fourth. The only problem with that for me is if he’s struggling Stotts won’t trust him and will revert back to Moe. It feels like his leash is so short for Layman, and I don’t understand why.
You obviously choose to use stats as a the basis of most of your arguments. I think others who believe he has an upside see "flashes" in his actual play. Similar to what some saw in Jake while others saw only the box score. When Zach was drafted many said it would take until his 3rd season before he would contribute to a playoff team. This was based on his age , build, and by watching other big men develop slowly as well.. I think he is on schedule. His offense at some point will start to click...as soon as he finds a go to shot and starts hitting it on a regular basis. I would be shocked if he doesn't improve his mid range shot by then. He clearly is a hard worker with a high basketball IQ. Right now his shooting is frustrating for sure. But everyone I talk to, whose basketball knowledge I respect, all like his upside.
I think I prefer for Jake to come off the bench. When he starts, he's marginalized as the fourth option behind Dame/CJ/Nurk. When coming off the bench, he can fire with impunity, get into a rhythm, and be much more effective. I think I like the Moe starting, Jake gunning dynamic better than the alternative.
I am coming around to this as well. Regardless who starts, play the one who is having the best game down the stretch in the 4th. Of course this is dependent on Moe getting healthy and playing consistent minutes.
questions? 1) which one between Harkless or Layman is the better scorer? 2) does the starting unit need more scoring or does the bench? The answer to those 2 questions might help you understand why it is what it is right now. starting has nothing to do with minutes as a player coming off the bench sometimes play more minutes and this way Stotts can evaluate which type of player he needs more under certain situations. It's a nice problem to have.
Though i tend to agree with you, playing devils advocate, then we should have Dame coming off the bench. I do think seniority and salary play a bigger factor into player minutes than it should with this team and i tend to think that comes from olshey.
Quick note--Amongst the 10 most common 3-man lineups including Layman, pairing him with Meyers and Collins has quietly become the most effective grouping. Small-sample-size, sure, but it's something to watch as he continues in a reserve role.
And there's the trick. Draft "prospects" and if they don't contribute insult the fans for being impatient. It helps when you draft players your coach isn't enthusiastic about, so he can share the blame by not doing everything he can to develop them.
Based on his size and athleticism for one. Those other guys don't have it like Collins. Is he foul prone? Yes. But that will decrease over time. I expect him to improve significantly between now and the end of the season, and I expect an even bigger jump next year. As long as he stays in the weight room he'll be fine. The only thing he's short on right now is strength. That will change.
In a perfect world - I would say start Mo and Layman and move CJ and Aminu to the 2nd unit. You're right though - fans (and sometimes players) get too hung up on who the starters are. As long as Layman gets enough minutes to help the team win, that's the important thing.
I would venture an educated guess that the coaching staff is doing everything they can to develop these players. It's in their best interest to do so and thinking they don't seems very foolish by anyone thinking that.
Huh? So you want to leave Lillard out on an island as the only real ball handler and only one that can truly break down a defense? If I was an opposing coach, I would jump for joy if I saw that lineup.
Stotts *is* pursuing his best interests. A new owner almost always means a new coach. Stotts is choosing to polish his resume by chasing regular season wins, rather than developing players that will only benefit the next Blazer coach. Very few NBA coaches prioritize player develop over winning now. With the team ownership future in limbo, a coach has even less incentive to focus on the long-term.
First, there is no new owner and this is not a developmental league, but every day coaches are working with players and teaching them how to play in the NBA game. Every head coaches job is to get his respective team the most wins that they can (unless they are tanking and Blazers aren't in that predicament) so I have no idea what this "pursuing his best interests" even means. Regular season wins is what get you to the playoffs so I consider this a positive.
