# OT: Blake asks for $6 million



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_6300564

The Lakers have already passed. Blake is talking to Miami and Denver now. No mention of PDX.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

I think that's more than Jack, Sergio, Kopponen, and Green combined...

Dan


----------



## BenDavis503 (Apr 11, 2007)

I got love for Blake, but I would rather have Jack, Sergio, Kopponen and Green for that much money.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Seems fair.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Blake isn't worth 6m, especially in light of Portland's cap space intentions in the next few years.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Blake might have an inflated sense of his value.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Blake is the best available point guard if you assume Williams goes back to the bucks.,perhaps excluding the Greek guy who has half a dozen teams offering him the full MLE.After him the best you could do is Brevin Knight and then Earl Boykins who was recently traded for Steve Blake and Julius Hodge.

This is a once in a lifetime oppurtunity for Blake,he's lucked into a situation where his services are in great demand and there isn't much of an alternative.He may not get the full MLE,but he's going to get a really nice contract.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Hap said:


> Blake might have an inflated sense of his value.


He's definitely worth $4-5M, so if he asks for 6, maybe he'll get what he's worth?


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

He is worth it. If Kapono and Walton got that much, I'd give that much to Blake for sure.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Is he going to start wherever he ends up? If so, then $6m per isn't unreasonable.

In any case, ASKING for that much isn't going to hurt him too badly... he'll still be one of the best/only PG FAs on the market...

Ed O.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

keep jack...


----------



## Anonymous Gambler (May 29, 2006)

The thing I like about Blake is that he plays decent defense. I think Jack and Sergio may be better in the long run, but if we signed Blake it would help with our perimeter D- leaving us the possibility of being solid defensively at all five positions.

I'd offer 6 million for 2 years with a team option for a third year, then trade Jack and filler for one of Atlanta's wings.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Jack is a better PG anyways, so this is hopefully a mute point for Portland. I don't understand peoples fascination with him.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

If that's what he's going to want, I'd much rather go with our current crop of point guards. In fact, I've wanted to stick with Jack all along and haven't been a proponent of brining Steve back.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Jack is 3 years younger and already better. I hope we give Jack another year to prove his longterm worth.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Jack's as good as gone.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

^ how do you figure that? i'd say that this only further shows jack isn't going anywhere...


----------



## furball (Jul 25, 2004)

Nuts. I like Blake, but I like JJ and SR much better.


----------



## Rip City Reign (Jul 1, 2007)

MARIS61 said:


> Seems fair.


Are you Steve's agent?

Blake is in NO WAY worth $6M/yr. Let's see more than 15-20 games of production per season before giving up that kind of jack!


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

I wouldn't sign Blake for a 3 year deal at any price. If Steve Blake is your starting PG, your starting PG sucks.

I wouldn't be opposed to getting him at a 2 year deal. But overpaying for mediocre players is not a good strategy.


----------



## Nate Dogg (Oct 20, 2006)

I like J. Jack and Sergio. I like both of their productive seasons. Theres no need to bring back S.Blake in my books.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

I'm a big fan of Jack, but was warming up to the idea of trading him (for a good draft pick or a SF) and signing Blake for some vet experience. But at that price, I'd MUCH rather stick with JJ.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Diable said:


> Blake is the best available point guard if you assume Williams goes back to the bucks.,perhaps excluding the Greek guy who has half a dozen teams offering him the full MLE.After him the best you could do is Brevin Knight and then Earl Boykins who was recently traded for Steve Blake and Julius Hodge.
> 
> This is a once in a lifetime oppurtunity for Blake,he's lucked into a situation where his services are in great demand and there isn't much of an alternative.He may not get the full MLE,but he's going to get a really nice contract.



Well thats just a nice way of saying, "The free agents point guards available this year are not worth it past Williams." 

Steve Blake isn't worth 6 million bones, and would do nothing to improve this team. The Blazers already have 2 point guards who are better then him.


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

I'm not going to tell you all how much I think losing Jack is a mistake but I will say that Blake is not worth that kind of change.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

hasoos said:


> Steve Blake isn't worth 6 million bones, and would do nothing to improve this team. The Blazers already have 2 point guards who are better then him.


It amazes me that Portland can be stocked with so many good players and yet have been so bad last year.

Don't you think you might be overestimating Jack and Sergio at this point in their careers?

Ed O.


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

If the blazer brass think that Steve Blake is better than Jack right now and has just as much future potential, and if they are assured of a deal in which they can involve Jack in a deal to upgrade our SF position, then they should be willing to pay the mle to Blake.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> It amazes me that Portland can be stocked with so many good players and yet have been so bad last year.


To be fair, Blake hasn't exactly powered a strong team, either.

Dan


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

dkap said:


> To be fair, Blake hasn't exactly powered a strong team, either.
> 
> Dan


The Nugs were 25-15 with him as the starting PG. That's pretty strong.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

From ESPN.com



> Big Decision
> 
> Jul 6 - Miami Lakes resident Cindy Blake, the mother of free agent guard Steve Blake, had a request Thursday for the Heat's president and coach.
> "If anyone talks to Pat Riley, put in a good word for Steve," she said. "We really want him back home."
> ...


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Ed O said:


> It amazes me that Portland can be stocked with so many good players and yet have been so bad last year.


Obviously, Zach was holding the team back. The young guys are all good players, but they will only now be able to experience the ball-movement necessary to show it. Ed, you must not have gotten the memo...


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

LA and Roy as freshmen were both hurt at different times last year for long periods. Oden was not even a thought! So now all three of these guys are here at the same time and on the same page, maybe that might change the outcome? Ya think?


----------



## Rip City Reign (Jul 1, 2007)

Ed O said:


> It amazes me that Portland can be stocked with so many good players and yet have been so bad last year.
> 
> Don't you think you might be overestimating Jack and Sergio at this point in their careers?
> 
> Ed O.


Blake is a known commodity, he just isn't that good. Jack is already a better defender and finisher than Blake. Blake is a slightly better distributor.

Sergio is far superior to Blake in terms of passing, and should improve as a defender as he gains experience. Blake will never be big enough to defend at a high level.

Why spend $6M and not improve your team?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

I'd rather have Brevin Knight. The fact that Blake is being talked about as such a superior option that Knight barely even gets mentioned (and that's as a "best of the rest") is criminal.

Knight isn't a star, but he's been a great offensive facilitator for years and maybe the most underrated point guard in the NBA during his career. He has a career 15.6 PER (average starter is 15 PER) and his Assist Rate is through the roof. I'd love for Portland to pick up Knight as their veteran point guard. Blake has basically never been as good as Knight's average.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Ed O said:


> It amazes me that Portland can be stocked with so many good players and yet have been so bad last year.
> 
> Don't you think you might be overestimating Jack and Sergio at this point in their careers?
> 
> Ed O.



Please remember context. I said they were better then him. I think Blake sucks. So that is what I am saying they are better then. 

Ed O I know you like to look at stats. I honestly think if you go evaluate the stats, and consider the caliber of players they were playing with, both of those guys are better then Blake. Jack is superior in all categories but turnovers, and some of the statistics aren't even close, like he averages 50% more scoring per game in the same minutes. Sergio was only in his first year, and averaged almost 3 assist to one turnover. That blows both of their assist ratios away. His shooting was not great, and needs to improve, but keep in mind he shot better then Blake from the field for the season, but Blake was better from the 3 point line. Now if you consider on the assist, that Blake was passing to Carmello Anthony and AI and only got about 5 assist per game in 33 minutes, that about says it all. 

So you can compare all you want, but the numbers say Jack is the best, and its not even close. Sergio is an easy equivelent to Blake, it probably just is a matter of what type of guard do you like. I like up tempo. Blake couldn't run an up tempo offense if his life depended on it.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> I'd rather have Brevin Knight. The fact that Blake is being talked about as such a superior option that Knight barely even gets mentioned (and that's as a "best of the rest") is criminal.
> 
> Knight isn't a star, but he's been a great offensive facilitator for years and maybe the most underrated point guard in the NBA during his career. He has a career 15.6 PER (average starter is 15 PER) and his Assist Rate is through the roof. I'd love for Portland to pick up Knight as their veteran point guard. Blake has basically never been as good as Knight's average.


If we trade Jack, I'd support that idea. Knight is solid and would be a good leader for our young guys. Knight is also loyal, he was willing to take less $$$ to stay with Charlotte.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

B_&_B said:


> If we trade Jack, I'd support that idea. Knight is solid and would be a good leader for our young guys. Knight is also loyal, he was willing to take less $$$ to stay with Charlotte.


Even if we have Jack, I'd like to have Knight, because Jack just isn't the passer and set-up guy that Knight is. Assuming Koponen and Fernandez don't play for us this year, I'd love to see this guard rotation for this season:

PG: Brevin Knight / Sergio Rodriguez
SG: Brandon Roy / Jarrett Jack

Even if Koponen stays here, he could slot in as a third-string PG next season. Taurean Green I'd send to the D-League unless he just decimates the summer league.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Ed O said:


> It amazes me that Portland can be stocked with so many good players and yet have been so bad last year.
> 
> Don't you think you might be overestimating Jack and Sergio at this point in their careers?
> 
> Ed O.


If you're taking that route, we did even worse the year that Blake started with us.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> I'd rather have Brevin Knight. The fact that Blake is being talked about as such a superior option that Knight barely even gets mentioned (and that's as a "best of the rest") is criminal.
> 
> Knight isn't a star, but he's been a great offensive facilitator for years and maybe the most underrated point guard in the NBA during his career. He has a career 15.6 PER (average starter is 15 PER) and his Assist Rate is through the roof. I'd love for Portland to pick up Knight as their veteran point guard. Blake has basically never been as good as Knight's average.


Not only that, but he's also been one of the leaders in steals. I think Knight could be a great pick up at a much cheaper price. I wouldn't throw anything above 3-4 at Blake right now.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Rip City Reign said:


> Blake is a known commodity, he just isn't that good. Jack is already a better defender and finisher than Blake. Blake is a slightly better distributor.


I'm fine with keeping Jack and passing on Blake (especially starting at $6 million and going up from there), but the stats don't support your claims. Both Jack and Blake are inferior defenders. They are both abused by quicker PGs. Jack's defensive rating was 112 last season and Blake's was 111. League average was 106. So, both are below average, but slight edge to Blake.

As far as being a slightly better distributor, Blake had a MUCH better AsR than Jack last year. In fact, Jack's AsR of 29.1 is below average for a starting PG. Blake's ASR for the season was 38.0 (3rd in the league for players who played at least 1000 minutes) and in the 49 games he played for Denver, his AsR was an outstanding 39.3 (same as Steve Nash's season AsR). 



Rip City Reign said:


> Sergio is far superior to Blake in terms of passing, and should improve as a defender as he gains experience. Blake will never be big enough to defend at a high level.


Flashier, yes. Far superior, no. Sergio's AsR of 40.0 is indeed excellent, but not much better than the 39.3 AsR Blake posted in Denver. Throw in the fact that Sergio's ToR of 14.1 was significantly higher than Blake's (12.0 season, 12.3 in Denver) and it could be argued that Blake is the better, more efficient, less turnover prone passer. Sergio is definitely more creative, but that's only one aspect of being a good passer. Taking care of the ball is equally important.

As far as defense goes, it's not Blake's size that's the problem. In Denver, he often guarded the other team's SG while the smaller, quicker Iverson guarded the other team's PG. Blake hustles on defense, but like Jack he lacks the lateral quickness to stop smaller, quicker PGs. 



Rip City Reign said:


> Why spend $6M and not improve your team?


On this we agree. Prior to the draft when it looked like we might be trading Jack to Atlanta for the 11th pick I was all for offering Blake the full MLE. We could have used that 11th pick to help address our need at SF and replaced Jack with Blake. Basically upgrading our weakest position by trading Jack and replacing him with Blake. It makes ABSOLUTELY no sense to go after Blake if we're not trading Jack. It will just create a log jam at the PG spot, just like two years ago, with no one PG the clear cut starter and each being slightly better in their own way (scoring - Jack, distributing and protecting the ball - Blake, creativity - Sergio). I'd prefer to just keep Jack as the incumbent starter and Sergio as the back-up. Either use the MLE to upgrade the SF spot, or use a portion of it to retain Ime with a two year deal (third year team option) starting in the $3 - $4 million range. That makes a lot more sense than adding yet another PG.

BNM


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Minstrel said:


> I'd rather have Brevin Knight. The fact that Blake is being talked about as such a superior option that Knight barely even gets mentioned (and that's as a "best of the rest") is criminal.
> 
> Knight isn't a star, but he's been a great offensive facilitator for years and maybe the most underrated point guard in the NBA during his career. He has a career 15.6 PER (average starter is 15 PER) and his Assist Rate is through the roof. I'd love for Portland to pick up Knight as their veteran point guard. Blake has basically never been as good as Knight's average.


The two knocks on Knight are his age (his performance is starting to decline) and his poor shooting. He's an absolutely abysmal 3-point shooter (0.150 career, 0.056). His career AsR of 38.8 is indeed outstanding (7th all-time), but Blake had a better AsR last season. Again, Knight shows signs of slipping as he getting older. His stats last year we down pretty much across the board. I sure wouldn't want to offer him anything more than two years guaranteed (with a team option for the third year), and even then only if we trade Jack. Two years ago, I would have loved to have Brevin Knight on our team. At this point, unless he's real cheap, I'd just stick with the younger, improving Jack over the older, declining Knight.

BNM


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

dudleysghost said:


> The Nugs were 25-15 with him as the starting PG. That's pretty strong.


Did you see how they were beaten in the playoffs? The defense forced Steve to beat them, and he was abysmal. No thanks.


----------



## Rip City Reign (Jul 1, 2007)

Minstrel said:


> Even if we have Jack, I'd like to have Knight, because Jack just isn't the passer and set-up guy that Knight is. Assuming Koponen and Fernandez don't play for us this year, I'd love to see this guard rotation for this season:
> 
> PG: Brevin Knight / Sergio Rodriguez
> SG: Brandon Roy / Jarrett Jack
> ...


IIRC, point guards also need to defend. Brevin Knight is too small to be a starter and Sergio cannot take the pounding that Deron Williams/Baron Davis etc will pass out.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

RipCity9 said:


> Did you see how they were beaten in the playoffs? The defense forced Steve to beat them, and he was abysmal. No thanks.


Well said. The Spurs just sat back and said "Steve, you are going to have to beat us." 

Blake had about 10 good minutes in the series, and quickly followed those 10 good minutes up with the necessary 5 minutes of horrible play to lead the Nuggets to loss number 3, and the slippery slope out of the series. 

Top it off with the fact that the guy only averaged 6 assist on a running team with AI and Carmello on it Make your own evaluation, but to me, that stat alone tells me he stinks.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I don't think that Knight is going to be all that cheap.At least he shall be able to go out and get a pretty substantial short term contract if that is what he wants to do.There simply aren't better options than he and Blake and there are lots of teams that really need point guards.He may take less to go somewhere he wants to go.


----------



## blue32 (Jan 13, 2006)

hasoos said:


> Well said. The Spurs just sat back and said "Steve, you are going to have to beat us."
> 
> Blake had about 10 good minutes in the series, and quickly followed those 10 good minutes up with the necessary 5 minutes of horrible play to lead the Nuggets to loss number 3, and the slippery slope out of the series.
> 
> Top it off with the fact that the guy only averaged 6 assist on a running team with AI and Carmello on it Make your own evaluation, but to me, that stat alone tells me he stinks.


LOL on a running team with CA and AI? Come on dude, you know they have the ball ALL THE TIME. Steve's going nowhere on a team with (2) huge ball hogs. I think that is a cheap comparison of his abilities...


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

blue32 said:


> LOL on a running team with CA and AI? Come on dude, you know they have the ball ALL THE TIME. Steve's going nowhere on a team with (2) huge ball hogs. I think that is a cheap comparison of his abilities...



Is it? Or is it a valid comparison of a point guard with 2 of the best finishers in the game, on a running team, not able to average more assist then he was when here, or in Milwaukee, or in Washington. If you are a good point guard on an up tempo team with those 2 on the floor, the assist will find their way to you if you are worth a damn.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

I don't care if we sign Blake or not. And if we do, not for more than 3 years. He's an OK vet placeholder until we develop our PG of the future. No way is he worth $6 million.

Jack is decent, but overrated by many Blazers fans. He's not Terry Porter. I hope we trade Jack with Joel, or Martell if we have to, to get Marvin Williams. Now that would be a talent upgrade. 

Maybe we end up with Sergio/"Pete"/and Green (or other aging vet). Heck, we might even get Dickau back once he gets cut. :biggrin: So what if we are down a good experienced PG -- Nate will just play Roy some at PG. He's going to be handling the ball at crunch time anyway. 

It would be worth being a little thin and inexperienced at PG this season to improve the SF position like that -- and we'd be set at C/PF/SF/SG for years to come.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Boob-No-More said:


> The two knocks on Knight are his age (his performance is starting to decline) and his poor shooting. He's an absolutely abysmal 3-point shooter (0.150 career, 0.056). His career AsR of 38.8 is indeed outstanding (7th all-time), but Blake had a better AsR last season.


Yet despite the higher AsR and Knight's weaknesses, Blake had a much lower PER last season. 



> Again, Knight shows signs of slipping as he getting older. His stats last year we down pretty much across the board.


There isn't a downward trend for Knight. His PERs the two seasons before last were very strong. Last season was down (just barely below average as a starter), but he's had down seasons before. He's only 31. I wouldn't say he shows "signs of slipping." I'd say it's a possibility that he could decline, but it's far from sure.



> At this point, unless he's real cheap, I'd just stick with the younger, improving Jack over the older, declining Knight.


Well, as I said...he's not declining (as per a trend). He had one down season last year, which was still a solid season. The reason I'd like Knight on the team is because he does something Jack doesn't--pass the ball extremely well. I think the team most needs a distributor at PG, to utilize Roy, Aldridge and Oden and that's what Knight does best. Sergio can pass well, but he's been inconsistent and may not be up to starting consistently yet.

I wouldn't be unhappy going with just the young guys, but *IF* we're going to sign a vet, I'd much rather have Knight than Blake.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

RipCity9 said:


> Did you see how they were beaten in the playoffs? The defense forced Steve to beat them, and he was abysmal. No thanks.


You're blaming the role player for the Nuggets losing to the champion Spurs? Umm... ok.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

hasoos said:


> Is it? Or is it a valid comparison of a point guard with 2 of the best finishers in the game, on a running team, not able to average more assist then he was when here, or in Milwaukee, or in Washington. If you are a good point guard on an up tempo team with those 2 on the floor, the assist will find their way to you if you are worth a damn.


It is a cheap comparison. You think playing with AI and Carmelo should lead to _more_ assists? Those guys create their own shots, so no it doesn't. Uptempo does help, but the idea that playing with big-time scorers should lead to more assists just isn't true.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Minstrel said:


> I'd rather have Brevin Knight. The fact that Blake is being talked about as such a superior option that Knight barely even gets mentioned (and that's as a "best of the rest") is criminal.


Knight is a bad defender but smart veteran. The main problem with him is that he is very injury prone, and that isn't going to improve as he nears the end of his career. You may think it's criminal, but watch how much more money Blake gets on the free agent market than Knight, because GMs know they can't count on Knight.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

dudleysghost said:


> Knight is a bad defender but smart veteran. The main problem with him is that he is very injury prone, and that isn't going to improve as he nears the end of his career. You may think it's criminal, but watch how much more money Blake gets on the free agent market than Knight, because GMs know they can't count on Knight.


Well, they're both bad defenders. But you're right about injury-prone, that's a good point. However, with the guard depth Portland has, it's not as big a problem. I'd love for Blake to make much more (as long as it's not with Portland) and for Knight to remain underrated and cheap. That's better for Portland, if they were to sign him.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Minstrel said:


> Yet despite the higher AsR and Knight's weaknesses, Blake had a much lower PER last season.


As I said in my previous post, Blake is out of the equation. His asking price it too high and since we have Jack, signing Blake would just create an unnecessary conflict with little, or no, benefit. BTW, Jack's PER was slightly higher than Knight's last year.. The difference is Jack is a second year player on the rise with a cheap contract. Knight will be 32 at the start of the season and he's on the decline.



Minstrel said:


> There isn't a downward trend for Knight. His PERs the two seasons before last were very strong. Last season was down


Let's see, two very high years followed by a down year. That sounds like a downward trend to me.

2004-05 PER = 18.0
2005-06 PER = 17.3
2006-07 PER = 14.3

Looks like a downward trend to me. He peaked three years ago. Two years ago he was still well above average. Last year he was slightly below average. So, he's gone from well above average to slightly below average and he'll be 32 by the time the season starts. If he was in his mid to late 20s I'd hold out hope that he just had a down year and could bounce back (which is exactly what he did in his late 20s). But at 32, I think his best years are behind him and I think he'll continue to slide. Feel free to disagree, but given his downward trend and his advancing age, I don't see him suddenly returning to well above average. 

Jack is cheaper, younger and improving. I can't see spending the money it would take to sign Knight. Brevin Knight, while a good distributor, isn't going to put the Blazers over the top this year or next. By the time this team is going deep into the play-offs he'll be 35 and well past his prime. Let the young guys have the PT to continue to grow and improve.

BNM


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

dudleysghost said:


> You're blaming the role player for the Nuggets losing to the champion Spurs? Umm... ok.


If you watched the series, you would have observed that. The Spurs at certain points of the game, forced the offense through Blake. They sagged off and said "Beat us." To be fair, they also did it with some other role players like JR Smith. Generally when you have players as talented as AI and Carmello, you have to take something away for you to win. In the case of Denver, they just locked down the two stars and dared the role players to beat them.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Boob-No-More said:


> Let's see, two very high years followed by a down year. That sounds like a downward trend to me.
> 
> 2004-05 PER = 18.0
> 2005-06 PER = 17.3
> ...


Not to me. The difference between 2004-05 and 2005-06 was basically insignificant. He had his two best years and then one worse one. That seems like no trend to me. One year is not a "trend."

In any case, as I said, I'm perfectly happy to go with the young players we have. The premise of my post(s) was that Knight is a much better option as a veteran point guard than Blake. Not that we need a veteran point guard.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

hasoos said:


> If you watched the series, you would have observed that. The Spurs at certain points of the game, forced the offense through Blake. They sagged off and said "Beat us." To be fair, they also did it with some other role players like JR Smith. Generally when you have players as talented as AI and Carmello, you have to take something away for you to win. In the case of Denver, they just locked down the two stars and dared the role players to beat them.


Yeah, the Spurs play very good defense and it disrupts opposing teams' offenses and helps them win games. Their defense frequently makes opposing players at one position or another look bad. That's how they built up a 16-4 record postseason record.

That doesn't change the fact that the Nugs were playing .625 ball for 50 games with Blake at the point, making the statement that he has never led a good team unequivocally false. Hasoos, you praise Sergio for putting up just under a 3 A/TO ratio, and Blake's is over 3. When he was a Blazer, it was almost 4.

Blake can't create scoring opportunities for himself very well, but he runs the sets precisely, plays some D, hits open 3s, takes care of the ball and doesn't play outside of his ability. You guys can say he sucks all you want, but playoff teams across the country right now in need of a point guard are all calling his agent. Mark Warkentein, George Karl and Nate McMillan raved about him, so it's clear they don't share your evaluation.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Watching the summer league game, Mike Conley's not looking too bad... Maybe some day.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

FYI
From ESPN.com



> Karl Wants Blake Back
> 
> Jul 10 - Of all the candidates to be the Nuggets' new point guard next season, coach George Karl is finding out he would rather have the one who was just there.
> "My whole thing is I think Steve Blake has earned the right to be the first one recruited," Karl said Monday. "His camp is going to make a decision, and we're going to make a decision."
> ...


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I think Knight is a very good option. He is a better defender than any PG we currently have, is a phenominal passer and floor general, a great steal man and good at getting to the hoop. The only knock on him, and it is a huge knock, is his inability to shoot.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> I think Knight is a very good option. He is a better defender than any PG we currently have, is a phenominal passer and floor general, a great steal man and good at getting to the hoop. The only knock on him, and it is a huge knock, is his inability to shoot.


Thanks but no thanks. After seeing the summer league games, GRANTED they were summer league, so far I think we need some shooters on the outside.

Hey, I have an idea, how about we trade for that Jack guy...oh wait...


----------



## malarky (Dec 18, 2006)

This is my first post so be gentle. I've lurked for a long time but am finally join in.

Seeing all these posts on Steve Blake got me thinking on how do we get him and keep the cap space down the road. 

Here is my idea: Offer Denver in a sign and trade, Jack and Priz for Blake. This enables us to offer Blake a 2 year deal with a team option for a 3rd year starting at about 7.5. This frees up Denver to move Camby to the Warriors for their 10mil trade exception and maybe next years 1st round pick. Now the question is why would everyone do this deal. 

Blake: He gets to come back to Portland and he gets about 2 mil more a year for taking a shorter term deal. This gives him a chance to get another long term deal when he is 29 and teams can be fooled into thinking he will age gracefully.

Denver: They get something for Blake and they get quality complimentary players in positions of need and a first round pick. Additionally, moving Camby gives them an extra couple of million of wiggle room under the luxury tax. 

Golden State: They get a great defensive big who can still run the floor. He fits their team and system perfectly. 

Portland: We give up 2 quality players but we get a veteran point who can help the team for a couple years while the young points develop. Additionally, we get an additional 7 million in salary relief in 2 years. This gives much more freedom to sign Outlaw to a contract and not completely kill the cap space down the road.

If they did this the situation in 2 years could look something like this:

PG: 
Sergio 1,576,696
Koponen 828,800

SG:
Roy 3,910,816
Fernandez 938,700

SF: 
Outlaw 5,000,000
Miles 9,000,000

PF:
Aldridge 5,844,827
Freeland 828,800

C:
Oden 5,361,240

2 1st round picks: 3,500,00

Total: 36,789,879

Restricted: Frye, Webster, McRoberts for a combined 10 mil in Qualifying offers.

If the cap is around 65 million that gives us 20-30 million to play with. This is assuming we don't sign any free agents or 2nd round picks beyond Blake and Outlaw and we let Jones walk at the end of this year when he opts out.


----------



## Anonymous Gambler (May 29, 2006)

A nice trade idea. I might do it- in the short term, Blake/Sergio is a good combo and we probably have enough big guys to cover Pyrzbilla's loss. The salary cap space would great if your math is right. let me think about it...


----------

