That's the big complaint by Torey and Eric in their latest video. - Grant is terrible at navigating screens. - When the small guard gets by Grant we have smaller players protecting the hoop than if Grant himself were able to help. Grant is a good off-ball defender. - When is Chauncey going to learn? - Will we see Grant getting cooked by someone like De'angelo Russell tonight? I think listening to these points is well worth it so I've created this separate post. It seems that as much as the Blazers being "figured out" is leading to some tougher times, it's also a lack of awareness (how about the foul to give we had at the end of the Denver game?) and adjustments that Chauncey is having problems with. This link should take to the beginning of the discussion at 3:05
I recall Chauncey talking about Hart earlier this year, and how he liked to guard the opposing teams best player, seems he would guard back court players better than Grant? I know its probably because Grant is lengthy, but id rather use him off ball around he rim. The other reason I think Grants wants to guard point of attack is he can leak out on a defensive rebound for fast break.
Not giving the foul was 100% a strategic/execution mistake. I'm not sure if Billups was unaware or if the players didn't execute, but with the ball in the hands of Jokic or Murray, you have to take a foul under 5-6 seconds. Grant isn't an ideal on-ball defender in those situations, but outside of Payton, I'm not sure who on the roster is ideal. What Grant does provide is the ability to switch on to a big for a little bit if there is a 1-5 PnR. Dame/Ant/Hart do not provide that option. Billups is inexperienced coach with a realatively undersized roster, so this comes with the territory.
Because Jerami Grant can guard small guards. He just had a brain fart at a crucial time but there's a lot of switching....it's like asking why Nic Batum would guard Chris Paul....I disagree with the criticism of Chauncey over this...I blame the roster other than Dame for dropping that game at the end...it was a collective loss ..Grant could have created a turnover or blocked Murray's shot and none of this would be an issue....we should have fouled before the shot and taken the OT or a win with a missed FT...Dame answered this whole question post game...pretty simple in my view...turnovers at the end of the game and second chance pts killed us....they had 22 second chance pts and we had 9....most pissed off post game I've ever seen Chauncey...and that's a good thing in my view.
Grant was a better option at that point because Hart is nursing a bad ankle. If Hart could move laterally he would have been guarding Murray. As it is Grant was still in position and Murray had to make a great shot. Sometimes there are issues with players we simply don’t know about sitting in our lazy boys critiquing the coach.
Murray can get his shot off, anyway, but Grant didn’t stick to him. Not enough. Hart’s ankle right now can only gut out so much. GP will be fun to see … soon … I hope.
If no one is ideal, then why don't we play Grant in an ideal way, which would be a role where he can play more team defense and help around the rim, and less against the types of players that exploit his biggest weakness (screen navigation)?
So a guard getting beat on the perimeter with Grant helping in the paint is the same thing as Grant getting beat and a guard helping?
As soon as Hart can actually run and move laterally or they have another decent defender i totally agree also. Problem right now is Hart is hurt. Watch him run down the court tonight. His ankle is taped so tight he is literally running flat footed. Yes getting Gary Payton actually playing might help this as well. At this point the Blazers have not had many games where either Dame, Keon, Hart and Payton have been available. So for now Grant might be the best option.
I don't think Grant should be covering guards throughout the game. They are too quick for him. However, I kind of get the reasoning in that circumstance. The last thing you want to do is foul the shooter up by 2. The rules favor the 3-point shooters so much these days that it is hard to get close to them for fear of being in their space when they land. So I can see where his length might have gone into Chancey's thought process. Would GP2 made a difference? Would he have been aggressive to the point where he might have fouled him? I am anxious to find out.
I find it senseless to compare a blown coverage to a system....it was a blown coverage. Grant knows that although he hit the big shot that got us back in the game, he's still getting kicked for his mistake here. It was a mistake period. There were several down the stretch, mainly allowing second chance pts. They had 22 second chance pts, we had 9...that's where we lost this game.
It's not even just Grant getting kicked here. The you tube guru's have deemed this Billups's fault and don't seem to want to address player availability.
i also think it's because chauncey realizes how poor of a rebounder grant is, while also knowing Hart is a monster on the boards. While having Grant on the perimeter is not ideal, it is preferable to having him battle PFs on the glass
and to add, we openly switch most pick and roll actions as is, so it's not a that big of a deal that grant starts out on the guard. my only gripe is that chauncey is so rigid with this. almost stottsian in a way. switch it up sometimes. like Dame can guard d'angelo russell. no need to hide him on a guy 6 inches taller than him.
Again I think it has to do with availability of the players he has. It may very well change a bit when all are available and healthy.
