Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Lineup That Might Work

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Soft Euro
    replied
    Ambidextrious wrote: View Post
    You still didn't have to look too far behind to find a serious contender with a PG who is a primary scoring option. The spurs were an Elite team for more than a decade. They have shown to have multiple scoring threats. Now they are in a decline because of aging players. In 2008-2009 the spurs were eliminated from the playoffs by a Dallas Mavericks squad that made it to the finals. You seriously can not blame Parker for their loss. He did everything in his power. He was having a career year all around the board.

    All I care about is winning, I want my PG to run an offense and make players better. Seeing as we have numerous holes in our offense and defense. How could you put a player like Calderon ahead of Bayless just because he knows how to run an offense. The game is changing, there are a few guards now a days that are mainly primary distributors. Many guards now are capable of scoring and playing within the offense. A good guard in my opinion is one that is defense first. We've seen on several occasions our PG getting blown by and allowing for our entire defense to break down. An ideal PG one that can score yet find his teammates and put them in a position to score. I agree with you on your last portion. The key to success is unselfishness.
    Dallas made it to the finals, but not in 2008-2009. Considering this is my size-fetish-week I'll say the Spurs are not declining because of age (only); look at their regular season record! I agree they are not contenders anymore though, but one main reason is because they play a PF with SF size.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tim W.
    replied
    Ambidextrious wrote: View Post
    You still didn't have to look too far behind to find a serious contender with a PG who is a primary scoring option. The spurs were an Elite team for more than a decade. They have shown to have multiple scoring threats. Now they are in a decline because of aging players. In 2008-2009 the spurs were eliminated from the playoffs by a Dallas Mavericks squad that made it to the finals. You seriously can not blame Parker for their loss. He did everything in his power. He was having a career year all around the board.

    All I care about is winning, I want my PG to run an offense and make players better. Seeing as we have numerous holes in our offense and defense. How could you put a player like Calderon ahead of Bayless just because he knows how to run an offense. The game is changing, there are a few guards now a days that are mainly primary distributors. Many guards now are capable of scoring and playing within the offense. A good guard in my opinion is one that is defense first. We've seen on several occasions our PG getting blown by and allowing for our entire defense to break down. An ideal PG one that can score yet find his teammates and put them in a position to score. I agree with you on your last portion. The key to success is unselfishness.
    Again, you're missing the point. Parker certainly had the ability to score, but over the season he sacrificed his scoring for the betterment of the team. And the reason he was able to do that was because he COULD run an offense and make his teammates better. He didn't NEED to score. That's my whole point. Bayless can score. Great. But unless he can do what a PG NEEDS to do, then who really cares because he's not going to be able to lead his team anywhere.

    In the last 30 years, only Isiah Thomas and Magic Johnson were PGs who won a Championship and who scored at least 20 ppg during the season. And they were also two of the best players at running an offense and making their teammates better.

    You can win a Championship without a shoot first PG. History has proven that over and over again. What is a LOT tougher is to win a Championship WITH a shoot first PG. At this point, Bayless is a shoot first PG who only passes when he can't shoot, and hasn't shown an ability to make his teammates better or run an offense. Until he shows that, then he's not the answer at PG for the Raptors.

    As for the game changing, it's still basketball. There are still 5 guys on the court together. Just because there is an influx of scoring PGs doesn't mean you need one to be able to compete.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ambidextrious
    replied
    Tim W. wrote: View Post
    You're not understanding my point. GarbageTime is exactly right. If your PG can score, that's great, but over the period of a season, he needs to be able to defer to teammates. The one season Parker averaged more than 20 ppg, the Spurs lost in the first round. And while Parker is a scoring PG, he also knows how to run an offense. Besides, the Spurs system is unique, as are their players. Both Ginobili and Duncan can run the offense.

    Billups never averaged 20 ppg over the course of a season.

    I remember reading an interview with Isiah Thomas a long time ago, about how, when he came into the NBA, he was more a scoring PG. And his team didn't have much playoff success. Then Chuck Daly took him aside and explained that, as the PG, he needs to make his teammates better. His scoring went down and the team eventually won back to back Championships.

    Now if a PG can put his team on his back for a short period, that's great. But players like playing with a PG who involves them, not just as an afterthought (dishing on drives they can't score) and the team functions better when everyone is playing unselfishly. And that usually starts with a PG who knows how to get people involved and make them better.
    You still didn't have to look too far behind to find a serious contender with a PG who is a primary scoring option. The spurs were an Elite team for more than a decade. They have shown to have multiple scoring threats. Now they are in a decline because of aging players. In 2008-2009 the spurs were eliminated from the playoffs by a Dallas Mavericks squad that made it to the finals. You seriously can not blame Parker for their loss. He did everything in his power. He was having a career year all around the board.

    All I care about is winning, I want my PG to run an offense and make players better. Seeing as we have numerous holes in our offense and defense. How could you put a player like Calderon ahead of Bayless just because he knows how to run an offense. The game is changing, there are a few guards now a days that are mainly primary distributors. Many guards now are capable of scoring and playing within the offense. A good guard in my opinion is one that is defense first. We've seen on several occasions our PG getting blown by and allowing for our entire defense to break down. An ideal PG one that can score yet find his teammates and put them in a position to score. I agree with you on your last portion. The key to success is unselfishness.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tim W.
    replied
    Just to add, if the Raptors can get a guy like a LeBron, or a Scottie Pippen, or a Larry Bird, an unselfish SF who sees the floor like PG and makes those around him better, than having a guy like Bayless might work. But there needs to be SOMEONE on the team who makes his teammates better. All the great teams have had them. At this point, the Raptors have none. EVen if DeRozan fulfills his potential, he's never going to be the type of player that sees the floor like a PG. Can the Raptors draft one next year? Maybe, but who knows, at this point?

    Leave a comment:


  • Tim W.
    replied
    Ambidextrious wrote: View Post
    You don't have to go too far to find those players. Tony Parker led his team to a championship in 2007 against the Cleveland Cavaliers averaging 24 points and only 3 assists in the finals. He didn't manage to get 20 ppg during the season but it was fairly close 18.6 ppg and 5.5 ast. Again in 2005 Chauncy Billups led his team to the finals against the spurs pouring in a team best 20.4 ppg, racking up 6.3 ast and 5 rbs in the finals. Similar to Parker Billups only managed to average 16.5 ppg and 5.8 ast during the regular season. This goes to show that your theory is flawed. In these circumstances it has shown that capable PG's are able to rise to the occasion during the playoffs. Making them harder to defend.

    Detroit Regular Season 2004-2005
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DET/2005.html

    San Antonio Regular Season 2006-2007
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2007.html

    Finals 2005
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/...05_finals.html

    Finals 2007
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/...07_finals.html
    You're not understanding my point. GarbageTime is exactly right. If your PG can score, that's great, but over the period of a season, he needs to be able to defer to teammates. The one season Parker averaged more than 20 ppg, the Spurs lost in the first round. And while Parker is a scoring PG, he also knows how to run an offense. Besides, the Spurs system is unique, as are their players. Both Ginobili and Duncan can run the offense.

    Billups never averaged 20 ppg over the course of a season.

    I remember reading an interview with Isiah Thomas a long time ago, about how, when he came into the NBA, he was more a scoring PG. And his team didn't have much playoff success. Then Chuck Daly took him aside and explained that, as the PG, he needs to make his teammates better. His scoring went down and the team eventually won back to back Championships.

    Now if a PG can put his team on his back for a short period, that's great. But players like playing with a PG who involves them, not just as an afterthought (dishing on drives they can't score) and the team functions better when everyone is playing unselfishly. And that usually starts with a PG who knows how to get people involved and make them better.

    Leave a comment:


  • GarbageTime
    replied
    Ambidextrious wrote: View Post
    You don't have to go too far to find those players. Tony Parker led his team to a championship in 2007 against the Cleveland Cavaliers averaging 24 points and only 3 assists in the finals. He didn't manage to get 20 ppg during the season but it was fairly close 18.6 ppg and 5.5 ast. Again in 2005 Chauncy Billups led his team to the finals against the spurs pouring in a team best 20.4 ppg, racking up 6.3 ast and 5 rbs in the finals. Similar to Parker Billups only managed to average 16.5 ppg and 5.8 ast during the regular season. This goes to show that your theory is flawed. In these circumstances it has shown that capable PG's are able to rise to the occasion during the playoffs. Making them harder to defend.

    Detroit Regular Season 2004-2005
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DET/2005.html

    San Antonio Regular Season 2006-2007
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2007.html

    Finals 2005
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/...05_finals.html

    Finals 2007
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/...07_finals.html

    Tony Parker is more of a scoring point guard.

    Billups is not a scoring point guard.

    I think Tim is looking at the player in general, and not just for an isolated period of time.

    Miami - Dallas = 0 scoring PGs

    Boston - LA = 0 scoring PGs

    LA - Orlando = 1 scoring PG (Jameer and he was more of a shooter than anything else)

    Boston - LA = see above

    Dallas - Miami = 1 scroing PG (Terry/Harris)

    outside of that, going back its only Tony Parker in the last decade. (who was admittedly there numerous times)

    I'm in total agreement with Tim here. A PG running an offense is more important than anything else. If they can score aswell, great. If they can play D aswell, great.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    There is no question Bayless has to improve his PG skills. However when looking at the end of last season, are people aware of who was playing those games? Outside of DD there was hardly any offensively gifted people playing. To get an assist the person you pass it to has to put the ball through the hoop. Those final stretch of games the starting lineup was:

    Bayless
    DD
    JJ
    ED
    Reggie

    with a bench of: Ajinca, Weems, Wright and Dorsey.

    Yes, a PG should make those around them better but, seriously, look at that lineup. Who can score the ball consistently outside of Bayless and DD?

    Part of being a good PG is recognizing what your team needs. During the those stretch of games it was scoring. DD wasn't going for 60 every night. Steve Nash is an example of a PG who can most definitely score when he has to but otherwise looks to involve everyone else (obviously Bayless has a long way to go in his PG skills compared to Nash - remember the point is Nash shoulders the scoring load when he has to).

    Of those final 8 games, the 2 games he started with Barbosa still playing he had 8 assists (CHI and ORL) and 8 assists versus PHI as well. Against CLE he actually came off the bench as Calderon started and had 28 pts but just 3 ast.

    Also, Isiah Thomas averaged around 18 points and 8 assists per game during the Pistons 2 championships (20 ppg in the 89-90 playoffs).

    Leave a comment:


  • Ambidextrious
    replied
    Tim W. wrote: View Post
    Elite PGs can do pretty much ANYTHING at will. That's what makes them elite PGs. They also can run an offense and make their teammates better.

    As for Calderon, if he were 5 years younger, I'd have no problem with him being the future at that position for the Raptors. Blaming him for the lack of Raptor success is a little ridiculous. His two biggest issues are his lack of defense and his injuries. His lack of scoring is the least of his problems.

    Name me the last PG from a Championship team that scored 20 or more ppg. In fact, name the last the 20+ppg scoring PG from a team that made it to the Finals.

    The fact is that it's incredibly difficult for a PG to run an offense through driving and kicking it out. It becomes predictable and easy to stop. Especially in the playoffs. Teams start preventing the PG from driving and there goes the offense.

    Bayless needs to do A LOT more than be able to score and drive the ball. Being a PG is a lot more difficult than that, which is why so many combo guards fail to make the transition. In fact, only a handful do. Chauncey Billups took 5 years and 5 teams to figure it out, and he might have one of the highest basketball IQs in the NBA.

    It's certainly popular now to have a PG that can score, but that doesn't mean you need one to win. And a lot of times it can even hurt.
    You don't have to go too far to find those players. Tony Parker led his team to a championship in 2007 against the Cleveland Cavaliers averaging 24 points and only 3 assists in the finals. He didn't manage to get 20 ppg during the season but it was fairly close 18.6 ppg and 5.5 ast. Again in 2005 Chauncy Billups led his team to the finals against the spurs pouring in a team best 20.4 ppg, racking up 6.3 ast and 5 rbs in the finals. Similar to Parker Billups only managed to average 16.5 ppg and 5.8 ast during the regular season. This goes to show that your theory is flawed. In these circumstances it has shown that capable PG's are able to rise to the occasion during the playoffs. Making them harder to defend.

    Detroit Regular Season 2004-2005
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DET/2005.html

    San Antonio Regular Season 2006-2007
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2007.html

    Finals 2005
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/...05_finals.html

    Finals 2007
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/...07_finals.html
    Last edited by Ambidextrious; Thu Aug 25, 2011, 03:41 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tim W.
    replied
    Ambidextrious wrote: View Post
    I somewhat agree with you, but I am inclined to disagree with you as well. Elite PG's are able to score at will. At the same time making their teammates better. What your saying is that you could care less about stats. Therefore we can make the assumption that Jose is your ideal PG. What has that gotten us so far? Your idea of a good PG is one that can distribute and make his teammates better. I agree with you on that, but your lead Guard needs to be able to score and defend. If your PG is able to break down defense and score. He will put more pressure of on defenses causing them to collapse leaving someone open. At that point it is up to the PG to get the ball to where it is supposed to be. That is where Jerryd Bayless needs to improve. I am sure he will find a way to improve in that area of his game. Other than that I am a Bay-liever.
    Elite PGs can do pretty much ANYTHING at will. That's what makes them elite PGs. They also can run an offense and make their teammates better.

    As for Calderon, if he were 5 years younger, I'd have no problem with him being the future at that position for the Raptors. Blaming him for the lack of Raptor success is a little ridiculous. His two biggest issues are his lack of defense and his injuries. His lack of scoring is the least of his problems.

    Name me the last PG from a Championship team that scored 20 or more ppg. In fact, name the last the 20+ppg scoring PG from a team that made it to the Finals.

    The fact is that it's incredibly difficult for a PG to run an offense through driving and kicking it out. It becomes predictable and easy to stop. Especially in the playoffs. Teams start preventing the PG from driving and there goes the offense.

    Bayless needs to do A LOT more than be able to score and drive the ball. Being a PG is a lot more difficult than that, which is why so many combo guards fail to make the transition. In fact, only a handful do. Chauncey Billups took 5 years and 5 teams to figure it out, and he might have one of the highest basketball IQs in the NBA.

    It's certainly popular now to have a PG that can score, but that doesn't mean you need one to win. And a lot of times it can even hurt.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ambidextrious
    replied
    I somewhat agree with you, but I am inclined to disagree with you as well. Elite PG's are able to score at will. At the same time making their teammates better. What your saying is that you could care less about scoring stats. Therefore we can make the assumption that Jose is your ideal PG. What has that gotten us so far? Your idea of a good PG is one that can distribute and make his teammates better. I agree with you on that, but your lead Guard needs to be able to score and defend. If your PG is able to break down defense and score. He will put more pressure of on defenses causing them to collapse leaving someone open. At that point it is up to the PG to get the ball to where it is supposed to be. That is where Jerryd Bayless needs to improve. I am sure he will find a way to improve in that area of his game. Other than that I am a Bay-liever.
    Last edited by Ambidextrious; Thu Aug 25, 2011, 04:42 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tim W.
    replied
    Ambidextrious wrote: View Post
    Agreed. Let's hope he will be stepping up next season. I wonder how his game will look in his prime. At this point I think he could be a 24-6-4 per 36 minutes type of player.
    I could care less about his stats. Two things I want from my PG. Run an offense and make teammates better. If he can't do those then he's not really a PG.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ambidextrious
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • Ambidextrious
    replied
    Tim W. wrote: View Post
    Unfortunately the stats prove nothing except for a short period he can score. The 5.6 apg highlights his biggest weakness, which is the fact that he's still more a combo guard than a PG. I'm still hopefull about Bayless, but until he learns how to run an offense and make his teammates better, he's no more the future at PG than Calderon is.
    Agreed. Let's hope he will be stepping up next season. I wonder how his game will look in his prime. At this point I think he could be a 24-6-4 per 36 minutes type of player.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tim W.
    replied
    Ambidextrious wrote: View Post
    Wow I was pretty accurate. His stats look very good as a starter. Even though we went 2-6 during that stretch. Realistically a 20 win team is not going to beat playoff teams a week or so away from playoffs. Like you said 18ppg-7ast would be more than fine as a starter. It's unlikely he will still be playing that many minutes as a starter next season. I see him playing around 28-32 mpg. 22ppg would be nice from Bayless although the 5.6 assists could use a boost. To maximize Jose's impact, he still needs at least 20 mpg to get his 8-8. Thanks for doing the research Matt. This proves that Bayless is our starter from here on out. With Dwayne Casey as our coach next season, he will implement a free flowing offense built on defensive stops. That will allow players like Bayless and DeRozan J.Johnson A.Johnson and Davis to utilize their athleticism and knack for the game.
    Unfortunately the stats prove nothing except for a short period he can score. The 5.6 apg highlights his biggest weakness, which is the fact that he's still more a combo guard than a PG. I'm still hopefull about Bayless, but until he learns how to run an offense and make his teammates better, he's no more the future at PG than Calderon is.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ambidextrious
    replied
    Matt52 wrote: View Post
    +1

    It is a catch 22 with starting Bayless. He has not shown consistency yet he hasn't been consistently given an opportunity to start. Calderon is a known commodity. The Raptors have had the most success with him coming off the bench with the second unit in years past. Bayless has had his most success starting - what if he averaged 18/7 over an entire season if given the opportunity? Coming off a 22 win season I'm not content to stay status-quo with a starting PG who has reached his full potential.

    Bayless' last 8 games of the year:

    37.8 min
    7.4-15.3 & 48.4%FG
    1.8-4.3 and 41.2% 3pt
    6.0-7.3 & 82.8% FT
    22.5 pts
    3.0 rebs
    5.6 assists
    0.3 blk
    1.1 stl
    2.8 to

    The Raps went 2-6 with 5 of 8 teams being playoff teams (1-4 versus playoff and 1-2 versus non-playoff).

    Excellent post.
    Last edited by Ambidextrious; Wed Aug 24, 2011, 07:56 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X