He's had a string of nice games and you've got to give it up for him. But right now he is a rookie that has barely played. He doesn't have all the athleticism in the world and for all his talents he has a lot of shortcomings (pun intended). He's doing a great job, let's see if he can keep it up, what happens when he meets the rookie wall, etc.
Ok, so you're the Portland franchise. You just came off a winning season, losing to the Rockets in 7 games who lost to the Lakers in 7 games who won the title. That's a pretty damn good year. Now, you start this year off pretty well, currently in 5th place in a stacked Western conference that you want to win. You have Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Pryz, Outlaw, Webster, Miller, and Fernandez who are must play. They are clearly your top talent who have proven themselves more or less. Of course you also have Blake who you can take a flier on whether or not he's necessary. Now divvy up the minutes between them and where does Bayless fit in?
His role is a bench energizer much like Outlaw who they have and is taller and more proven. He's not much of a point guard or a 3 point shooter so he can't really fill in the roles of Blake, Fern, or Miller. The way the team was constructed, he wasn't going to play, plain and simple. No team has been ravaged by injury this year remotely as much as Portland. Oden, Pryz, Outlaw, Batum, and Fern are pretty much out for the season. Did Bayless really win the game single handed? Or is there simply nowhere else for the Blazers to turn to. They absolutely need him and and he delivered. That's fantastic, but I can't see what the Blazers did wrong per se.
Jeez they played someone named Jeff Pendergraph and Dante Cunningham for 25 minutes last night! That's how bad it is over there. If the Knicks lost Harrington, Lee, and Chandler, do you not think Gallo would step up for 31 points and 7 rbs? Do you really like Bayless that much to want him over Gallinari?
12/24/2009 8:16 PM
