? Why did Bayless slide so far in the draft? It seems to be a pretty great draft class. There are only a few guys drafted ahead of him that aren't currently producing and looking like they'll be at least quality starters for years. Several look to be All Star type talents. it was a good year to be at the top of the lotto STOMP
I agree with everything you said except Billups. Billups really isn't a true point guard. Throughout his career he has been a scorer, and a decent playmaker. If anything, I think Bayless could be very much like Billups with a little work.
Yeah, I hesitated to put him in that list. Probably doesn't belong there. As far as Bayless falling to 11th in the draft, perhaps other GM's just screwed up. It has been known to happen.
I completely agree, though it would be nice to have a small forward with some play-making skills to go along with Roy and Bayless. To paraphrase Rick Patino, John Stockton isn't walking through that door.
I'm not sure what you mean by pure PG... it seems everyone has their own definition. Certainly you aren't eliminating scoring PGs as you've got Billups and Paul included. by what I consider to be a pure PG (a pass first playmaker who directs the action) you're omitting several including Sergio Augustin and Ridenour. STOMP
What has a pure point guard gotten for any team to be even discussed so much? Nash, Kidd, Williams, and Paul so far all have shown to be chokers in the playoffs. If you look at the last 10 teams to win the title. None of them have what many of you describe as a "true" point guard nor are any of them the focal point of their team. Bayless is exactly the type of guard to put next to Roy.
bayless reminds me alot of tony parker but cant finish as good, and has better defense. worked well for san antonio no?
I'm a bit (ok more than a bit) biased towards Batum, but he seems pretty good leading the fast break, he's capable of making some nice, quick entry passes to LMA or Oden, and he knows how to swing the ball around to find the open man for the 3. His biggest weakness as a playmaker is driving and dish to the open man, though I get the sense that the driving is the bigger problem. Also, steals and blocks create easy buckets just as well as a nice pass. I think he'll end up being the perfect fit, just hope we can keep all these guys.
I would say that a "true" point guard can do both, but is most effective when distributing the ball. In addition, they have that rare ability to put other players on their teams in a position to succeed. They also are a coach on the floor, able to create plays out of nothing. They also see the floor in a way most players never will, seeing things unfold before they actually happen. How many times during Kidd's career did you see him make a play and wonder how in the hell he knew it would work? I would say that a true point guard is one who can force their will on a game via passing alone. In all honesty, Sergio can really only pass and his assists seem incidental so he is out. I haven't seen Augustine play since his freshman year at Texas, so I can't really say anything about him. Ridenour can pass ok, and score a bit, but his teams (outside of one year in Seattle) haven't ever been very successful. He just doesn't impose his will on the game in any way. At least, I haven't ever seen him do so. I have certainly seen Kidd, Nash and Paul completely dominate a game without scoring. I saw Stockton and Magic do the same. In fact, according to this criteria, I would say LeBron is a true point guard, since he has dominated games without scoring much.
I don't disagree, and think he might grow into such a player. He certainly isn't there yet. I see Batum right now as a homeless man's Tayshawn Prince. If he manages to get to the same level a Prince, Portland will be very, very happy.
Well, that counts me out then. I have given up on Sergio and believe the team needs to go in a different direction, ala Bayless.
He slid because people who understand the game watched him play and recognized his shortcomings and limitations, and drafted better players who were available. Had we not pre-arranged a trade, he would have slid to 13 where we could have had him for free. I cannot imagine what team(s) anyone thinks he would be starting on now, but he may eventually find a starting SG position in another year or 2.
Seriously, do you believe that if OKC drafted Bayless instead of Westbrook, he would not have been afforded the same opportunities they gave Westbrook? Really? Insert Clippers, Grizzlies and Bobcats as needed.
The prearranged trade you're talking about was dependent on Bayless or DJ being available. If Bayless wasn't available at 11 the trade was void. I'm not sure how you could know about the prearranged trade without knowing that fact.
All I know is I'm glad Bayless did fall. The Roy/Bayless combo has been incredible so far (in their very limited time together) and looks like they'll be a top 3 NBA backcourt, with a very good chance at being the best.
Well, and the fact that the Kings were going to pick Bayless at #12, so he would NOT have been available at 13. The Kings STILL want him.
