Thread Tools

Display Modes

MrJayremmie · 05-03-2008, 09:46 AM

^That is definitely an option.

IMO, though, i'd rather give him a whole season see how he plays in the NBA and see how he works with Roy before you do anything.

All signs are pointing to the fact that this kid is going to be special. I'd want to hold onto him. Worst case scenerio he guards the SFs in the NBA and plays SF on offense...

**STOMP** · 05-03-2008, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrJayremmie

And don't compare Jason Kidd. Different players have different levels of being in shape.

sorry, I think your point is just plain silly. When I was in my early 20's, I'd play full court hoops for hours on end daily with a fraction of the breaks that happen in the league. Unlike Roy, I didn't have a staff of professionals prepping me for this. I've multiple friends that run century races at altitude... I've one friend that wins those races. Having spent years in the back country of California's High Sierras working for the state Dept. of Fish and Game doing research that required intensive physical work, I absolutely know that you're completely underestimating what the body is capable of. Attached are a few pix from my summer adventures/work including one of my runner friend who wins those races and some other summer work fun including ripping up the mountaineer's trail on Whitney last summer (we did it in 4 hours).

Dribbling the ball upcourt and calling a play for 20 minutes a night (with breaks galore) is no big deal at all for a highly trained athlete. I'm not sure why guarding a PG is so daunting in your view, or even why (in a rotation with Blake and Rudy) that task would fall to BR. Not that he hasn't done so effectively and couldn't continue to do so even better as he matures/grows stronger, but he is the biggest of the 3 by a good margin. It would make more sense to me (and others posting here) for the team's best interests that Rudy and Blake would guard the smaller player on D.

STOMP

MrJayremmie · 05-03-2008, 10:09 AM

Quote:

When I was in my early 20's, I'd play full court hoops for hours on end daily with a fraction of the breaks that happen in the league. Unlike Roy, I didn't have a staff of professionals prepping me for this. I've multiple friends that run century races at altitude... I've one friend that wins those races. Having spent years in the back country of California's High Sierras working for the state Dept. of Fish and Game doing research that required intensive physical work, I absolutely know that you're completely underestimating what the body is capable of. Attached are a few pix from my summer adventures/work including one of my runner friend who wins those races and some other summer work fun including going up the mountaineer's trail on Whitney last summer (we did it in 4 hours).

nice, those are awesome pics.

Quote:

Dribbling the ball upcourt and calling a play for 20 minutes a night is no big deal at all for an athlete. I'm not sure why guarding a PG is so daunting in your view, or even why (in a rotation with Blake and Rudy) that task would fall to BR. Not that he hasn't done so effectively and couldn't continue to do so even better as he matures/grows stronger, but he is the biggest of the 3 by a good margin. It would make more sense to me for the team's best interests that Rudy and Blake would guard the smaller player on D.

I'm saying that Roy will get tired quickly, if he has to dribble the ball up per press every play. He will not be used to his full potential as a PG. We have other players that would run it better while Roy is playing SG. Roy already runs the point for about 5 minutes a game at crucial times.

I'm not speculating about Roys stamina here, I've seen him tired out in 4th quarters and DEFINITLEY by the end of the season, and he wasn't even a full-time PG which would make him even more tired. We need to try and keep Roy as fresh as possible if we are planning on advancing in the playoffs.

I think that Roy can definitley take on a little more of the PG role and play with Rudy a bit, but to suggest that we should make hima full time PG is rediculous. That isn't what he is.

Just because he has point guard skills doesn't mean that we should put him at the PG position and not utilize him as good as possible to his max potential which is in the teams best interest.

I do understand that by putting Roy at the PG position we can get a nicer line-up by taking out Blake at putting him as a backup PG and then puttin' Roy and Webster at the 2 and 3. But this isn't like NBA live, it doesn't really work like that.

mook · 05-03-2008, 10:39 AM

these kinds of debates always crop up when you have two extremely talented players at the same position. who doesn't remember arguing:
Anthony vs Stoudamire at PG
Rider vs Bonzi at SG
Bonzi vs Smith at SG
Bonzi vs Anderson at SG
Sheed vs Brian Grant at PF
Sheed vs Zach at PF
Zach vs Aldridge at PF
there are probably several others I can't even recall.
now we've got Roy vs Fernandez at SG.
how did we resolve this problem in the past? well, the pattern is pretty clear. we played one of the two guys out of position for a season or two. one of the guy's value often dropped, although not always. then we traded one of them or one of them became a has-been. you see the pattern over and over and over again.
is this the plan for Roy/Fernandez? probably. why? because it's a big risk for a GM to trade one of the two without first seeing which is better. it's not necessarily the best strategy for the team, but it's the best strategy for the GM's career. GMs are typically fired for making bad trades. they aren't usually fired for trades they should've made but didn't.
so a year or two from now there'll be a clear "keeper" and likely a guy we clearly need to trade for an upgrade at a position of need. until then we'll debate playing Roy out of position at PG or SF, because both guys will merit huge minutes.

MrJayremmie · 05-03-2008, 10:49 AM

We can argue all we want, but imo, its a pretty nice predicament to be in.

I wouldn't hesitate to trade Rudy along with like Outlaw, Jack, Webster, LaFrentz and our pick and future 1st to try and get the #1 pick. Depends what team lands the #1 and if they don't need a PG i think we have a shot. Very small shot of course, but a shot.

I just had my 2nd dream about Derrick Rose and have been day-dreaming all day of us randomly landing the #1 pick and how awesome Rose would be with Roy, Aldirdge and Oden... *sigh*

But i would hesitate to trade Rudy for a non-star older player (lets say like Calderon) before i see what he becomes and how he fits with Roy. But for like aRose? damn... i'd do it.

**STOMP** · 05-03-2008, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrJayremmie

I'm saying that Roy will get tired quickly, if he has to dribble the ball up per press every play.

teams don't press anyone every play even in the playoffs when they're selling out. And I'm sure if they try to press Portland with Roy at the point, there will be a flurry of dunks to entice them to stop.

Quote:

He will not be used to his full potential as a PG. We have other players that would run it better while Roy is playing SG. Roy already runs the point for about 5 minutes a game at crucial times.

wrong! He split point duties with Blake this year. He'd still do so when teamed with Blake next year and only be the main point when paired with Rudy approx 15-20 minutes a game. Doing so is not a big deal at all.

Quote:

I'm not speculating about Roys stamina here, I've seen him tired out in 4th quarters and DEFINITLEY by the end of the season, and he wasn't even a full-time PG which would make him even more tired. We need to try and keep Roy as fresh as possible if we are planning on advancing in the playoffs.

I think his injuries (groin pull) had everything to do with him being worn out at the end of the season, and for the umpteenth time he's not going to be the full time point. You're arguing against a strawman here.

Quote:

I think that Roy can definitley take on a little more of the PG role and play with Rudy a bit, but to suggest that we should make hima full time PG is rediculous. That isn't what he is.

...and again. btw, it's ridiculous

Quote:

Just because he has point guard skills doesn't mean that we should put him at the PG position and not utilize him as good as possible to his max potential which is in the teams best interest.

your opinion. Mine is with Nate, KP, and Brandon

Quote:

I do understand that by putting Roy at the PG position we can get a nicer line-up by taking out Blake at putting him as a backup PG and then puttin' Roy and Webster at the 2 and 3. But this isn't like NBA live, it doesn't really work like that.

I don't play video games, thats you. I do work out a ton and play lots of hoops though. With your objections to expanding Roy's PT at the point over endurance concerns and saying you think Rudy can play SF in the league, I don't think we're ever going to come close to agreeing until next season starts and settles matters.

looking forward to it

STOMP

MrJayremmie · 05-03-2008, 10:59 AM

Quote:

don't think we're ever going to come close to agreeing until next season starts and settles matters.

Pretty much.

Anonymous Gambler · 05-03-2008, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mook

these kinds of debates always crop up when you have two extremely talented players at the same position. who doesn't remember arguing:
Anthony vs Stoudamire at PG
Rider vs Bonzi at SG
Bonzi vs Smith at SG
Bonzi vs Anderson at SG
Sheed vs Brian Grant at PF
Sheed vs Zach at PF
Zach vs Aldridge at PF
there are probably several others I can't even recall.
now we've got Roy vs Fernandez at SG.
how did we resolve this problem in the past? well, the pattern is pretty clear. we played one of the two guys out of position for a season or two. one of the guy's value often dropped, although not always. then we traded one of them or one of them became a has-been. you see the pattern over and over and over again.
is this the plan for Roy/Fernandez? probably. why? because it's a big risk for a GM to trade one of the two without first seeing which is better. it's not necessarily the best strategy for the team, but it's the best strategy for the GM's career. GMs are typically fired for making bad trades. they aren't usually fired for trades they should've made but didn't.
so a year or two from now there'll be a clear "keeper" and likely a guy we clearly need to trade for an upgrade at a position of need. until then we'll debate playing Roy out of position at PG or SF, because both guys will merit huge minutes.

I think the big key here is that we don't really even know if we have a competition yet. We have an all star SG (god, it feels good to write that!) and a prospect coming in who is likely an NBA shooting guard. I think it starts with Rudy backing up Roy- if he's good enough to need more minutes, then we worry about playing someone out of position or we trade him. Either way, with a good GM, this is a nice problem to have. I'd like to think that Pritchard could have traded Zach or Sheed for a good return had he been in charge back then.

If Rudy shows talent, then he may be our way of filling our holes at SF or PG. He may also just become a great 6th man for a few years.

I think it's too early to tell, but since this is a forum, my early take is to keep Roy at his best position- SG- and to maneuver the rest of the pieces.

I would trade Rudy in a second for a Devin Harris type and would probably add a lot more to the deal to make it happen.

**Oldmangrouch** · 05-03-2008, 12:52 PM

Let us not forget the great Jim Paxson/Clyde experiment.

To make room for Clyde, Jim was moved to PG. In less than a year, he went from all-star SG to being traded for a scrub just to be rid of him. The move totally trashed his confidence and wrecked his career!

One would hope Roy isn't the mental wimp Paxson was....but I still believe SG is his best position.

mook · 05-03-2008, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anonymous Gambler

I think it's too early to tell, but since this is a forum, my early take is to keep Roy at his best position- SG- and to maneuver the rest of the pieces.

I've waffled on what we should do with Roy. part of me says to just run him at SF. but another side of me agrees with you and says, "You don't play a franchise player out of position. It's the job of everyone else to fit in around Roy, Aldridge and Oden."

today I'm more inclined to leave Roy at SG and have Rudy come off the bench. but that could change the first time I see Fernandez drop 30 points.

Quote:

I would trade Rudy in a second for a Devin Harris type and would probably add a lot more to the deal to make it happen.

I think that's really selling Fernandez short. Rudy would likely be a top 5, maybe top 3 draft pick this year. would you trade Devin Harris for that quality of pick? I wouldn't. that high a pick nets you a chance at a franchise player, and Devin Harris isn't ever going to be a franchise player. Fernandez might be.

B-Roy · 05-03-2008, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mook

I think that's really selling Fernandez short. Rudy would likely be a top 5, maybe top 3 draft pick this year. would you trade Devin Harris for that quality of pick? I wouldn't. that high a pick nets you a chance at a franchise player, and Devin Harris isn't ever going to be a franchise player. Fernandez might be.

I don't think so, espeically since the last few international prospects havn't been able to live up to the hype. PG is a position in which the Blazers are in dire need. I'd deal Rudy for Harris in a millisecond. You're

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes