[Grades] Grades v. Blazers 3/1/2015

[upinsmoke]

I disagree I think you do wait for Ray to develop But of course if someone makes a generous offer you take it but that's with 95% of the league. I think he has an excellent chance of becoming a heck of a player and contribute to a winning team.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

McCallum appears to be a nice kid, and could help a good team, in much the same way that a Patty Mills can contribute to a good team. I am, personally, psychologically predisposed to keeping the players we draft, as I always want to root for guys playing for the team that drafted them, whether they're Hall of Famers or towel wavers, as long as they're good guys. But, McCallum is absolutely not a player that you "wait for." I hope I'm not supposed to be compelled by YouTube videos because, I mean, big deal, Quincy Douby scored thirty-two points in a game once. Anthony Johnson had 27/10 in a game once.

I'm not saying that the kid is a bum but, seriously, you can find 2-3 guys as good as McCallum in the second round of every draft that's ever happened. Every team in this league has a player nailed to the end of their bench who could score twenty points, if you gave them seventeen shots. And honestly, McCallum has more than a little bit of Douby in him: he's not a natural play maker, but he's not big enough to be a full-time shooting guard, unless you're going to invert your backcourt and play him alongside a big point guard. His NBA destiny is most likely tied to him being a backup point guard, and if he's your primary backup, your starter had better have an adamantium skeleton.

 

[Bricklayer]

I disagree I think you do wait for Ray to develop But of course if someone makes a generous offer you take it but that's with 95% of the league. I think he has an excellent chance of becoming a heck of a player and contribute to a winning team.

Would you like me to post a string of Jimmer highlight vids in response?

Every NBAer is going to have a handful of games where they are really good. It might be enough to prove they deserve a spot in the league. Its not remotely enough to prove they are going to do anything like that every night.

And again, we are two seasons in now on a player who will turn 24 in June. He's not going to age out, but that does mean he's likely approaching full maturity of his game.

Per 36
Yr 1: 11.2pts 4.8ast 0.9stl on .377 FG%
Yr 2: 12.2pts 4.2ast 1.0stl on .432 FG%

Yr 1 Offensive rating: 98 Defensive Rating: 112
Yr 2 Offensive rating: 98 Defensive Rating: 111

on/off per 100 possessions
Yr 1: -5.7off -2.1def -3.6total
Yr 2: -7.8off +4.0def -11.8total


I don't have an agenda against Ray McCallum. I would cheerfully take any and all players who looked like impact guys for us. But there haven't been many signs with Ray, and particularly no signs that he can really help us win. He's 4-11 in 15 career starts. His +/- this year has been catastrophic even by our bench standards. He has definitely had his moments, is getting a little better and can probably play for some years in this league. But the overall evidence isn't suggesting he's trending toward being an important piece.

 

[mac]

McCallum appears to be a nice kid, and could help a good team, in much the same way that a Patty Mills can contribute to a good team. I am, personally, psychologically predisposed to keeping the players we draft, as I always want to root for guys playing for the team that drafted them, whether they're Hall of Famers or towel wavers, as long as they're good guys. But, McCallum is absolutely not a player that you "wait for." I hope I'm not supposed to be compelled by YouTube videos because, I mean, big deal, Quincy Douby scored thirty-two points in a game once. Anthony Johnson had 27/10 in a game once.

I'm not saying that the kid is a bum but, seriously, you can find 2-3 guys as good as McCallum in the second round of every draft that's ever happened. Every team in this league has a player nailed to the end of their bench who could score twenty points, if you gave them seventeen shots. And honestly, McCallum has more than a little bit of Douby in him: he's not a natural play maker, but he's not big enough to be a full-time shooting guard, unless you're going to invert your backcourt and play him alongside a big point guard. His NBA destiny is most likely tied to him being a backup point guard, and if he's your primary backup, your starter had better have an adamantium skeleton.

Not to mention that if you were going to have him as a full-time shooting guard there are a lot of better natural scorers out there that are similarly end-of-benchers.

 

[upinsmoke]

Would you like me to post a string of Jimmer highlight vids in response?

Every NBAer is going to have a handful of games where they are really good. It might be enough to prove they deserve a spot in the league. Its not remotely enough to prove they are going to do anything like that every night.

And again, we are two seasons in now on a player who will turn 24 in June. He's not going to age out, but that does mean he's likely approaching full maturity of his game.

Per 36
Yr 1: 11.2pts 4.8ast 0.9stl on .377 FG%
Yr 2: 12.2pts 4.2ast 1.0stl on .432 FG%

Yr 1 Offensive rating: 98 Defensive Rating: 112
Yr 2 Offensive rating: 98 Defensive Rating: 111

on/off per 100 possessions
Yr 1: -5.7off -2.1def -3.6total
Yr 2: -7.8off +4.0def -11.8total


I don't have an agenda against Ray McCallum. I would cheerfully take any and all players who looked like impact guys for us. But there haven't been many signs with Ray, and particularly no signs that he can really help us win. He's 4-11 in 15 career starts. His +/- this year has been catastrophic even by our bench standards. He has definitely had his moments, is getting a little better and can probably play for some years in this league. But the overall evidence isn't suggesting he's trending toward being an important piece.

Enough with the Jimmer comp and it's not like I posted some slam dunk highlight real it's literally from just the other night. McCallums game passes the eye ball test and imo has the room to grow even further still.

 

[lawlman91]

IMO too early to make judgments about Ray. All we can do is hope that he gets better. Doesn't show signs that he can't get better

 

[206Fan]

IMO too early to make judgments about Ray. All we can do is hope that he gets better. Doesn't show signs that he can't get better

Yea you're right. I can see his game flourish like Kyle Lowry's in a few years. However, the Mario Chalmers comparison really hit me in the head. Mario Chalmers is not a real starting PG in any team in the NBA, but he started for Miami because they basically needed a filler. They needed someone who could bring the ball up every now and then, while also defending. The Heat composed of 3 all stars, 2 of those who were dominant ball handlers. Not like Rudy and Cuz, but real ball handlers who's game involved them distributing the ball.

I'm with you though, what says Ray can't get better? However, to counter myself, I believe his ceiling is a little limited. He's neither a great scorer nor great passer yet.

 

[Amit149]

I don't think its a given that any of our unrestricted freeagents will be retained. If I had to pick one, it would probably be Miller because of what he brings in experience and his knowledge of Karls system. But it would probably depend on the price. As far as Casspi goes, once again it probably comes down to his asking price, and who we might be able to acquire in his stead. Would you rather have a Casspi, or a Wilson Chandler as an example? Casspi would be where I draw the talent line in the sand, and anyone I'd choose over him would have to be above that line. Lets face it, Casspi has holes in his game, and one is an important one in Karls system. The ability to hit the 3 pt shot. Yes, he's having the worse year of his career, but he's never been a good 3 pt shooter in any year, last year being his best, which was just in the respectable range. So yes, I'd like to have him back, but if I can find someone that's better overall, I'd say goodbye to him.

If we can't do any better than Ryan Hollins as our backup center, I'll blow my brains out. I think this past year has proven that the backup center position is an important one, and to fill that role with a player that's slightly better than a mannequin is ridiculous. Especially when you spent the entire offseason, right up until the trade deadline trying to trade the only other player on the team (Thompson) that was capable of playing that position. Hollins seems like a nice guy and I wish him no ill will, but he should have "Use in case of emergency only"on the back of his jersey. Reggie Evans just doesn't fit with the direction this team seems to be going. He's a poor passer and ballhandler. He has little to no offensive game. Defensively, he's pretty good around the basket when matched up properly, but he's downright terrible away from the basket. He's a terrific rebounder, and apparently a great locker room guy. I don't know if those last two reasons are enough to keep him on the team unless he wants to play for the team minimum. And even then, I'd have to see if the money couldn't be better spent.

One thing has become obvious to me of late and watching last nights game in particular. Without Cousins on the floor, we have a huge drop in talent, and ability to match up in the post area. Last night I watched Portland throw one big after another at us. Lopez, 7 foot, Aldridge, 6'11", Kaman, 7 foot, Leonard, 7 foot, and thank god Freeland, a 6'11"player was injured and didn't play. We need a serious upgrade at the backup center position, and at the starting PF position, and both are important if we seriously plan on being a contending team. We can't go down the toilet everytime Cuz misses a game or two, nor should we lose a lead everytime Cuz goes to the bench. Anyway, I know I'm preaching to the choir here.

I agree with you that Casspi has holes in his games, but I think we should try and keep him. what it comes down to in my opinion is that Omri is an above average back-up SF and we have a below average bench. you mentioned having Wilson Chandler instead as an example- but I think that it would be a dumb move to bring a guy like him to be Rudy's back-up considering Rudy is probably our 2nd best player. that's just bad for building the roster. we have much more pressing needs at Center, SG and PF than to get a high calliber back up SF.

 

[lawlman91]

It's only been a few days since Coach Karl called McCallum a "conservative point guard" to the media. Let's call that the "Incident". I think that's what started it all -- Ray's aggressive drives to the hoop (as it was in the first game after the Incident), passes to big men after driving (as it was in the second game after the Incident), and a boost in overall confidence for Ray. As collateral damage, Ray's aggressiveness probably gave Ben McLemore a mental go-ahead to also be aggressive. He's been making wild shots lately, as does McCallum, but that's just young players pushing their limits.

We now see the true form of McLemore and McCallum. They are now outside of the conservative shell that many players have struggled to get out of.

I argue that any judgments on these two players should be very heavily affected by their play after the Incident, since this is their true form -- their college selves, the one that got them to the NBA in the first place.