# Yo, Damon Stoudamire is having a pretty great season.



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Is anyone noticing?

Yes, his shooting has been awful... and yet he STILL ranks as the 17th best player overall statistically this season according to Yahoo.com.

Why? Check this out:

The dude is SECOND in the NBA in assist to turnover ratio: 5.5 to 1. He has 44 assists and only 8 turnovers. The guy who is #1 is Antonio Daniels who doesn't play as many minutes so it is less impressive.

Damon is 13th in the NBA in steals with 1.82 a game.

AND.... he is averaging 5.3 rebounds per game, which is unbelievable for a guy who's not even 6 feet tall.

When his shooting improves, and it will, look out, he could be due for a career season.

Go Blazers


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

More perspective: This is best year of his career, so far, for rebounds, steals, and turnovers. Go Damon!!


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

Nice thread,I'm glad to see we still have some Damon fans here on this board...All players go through shooting slumps,he'll break out of it sooner then later.


----------



## amd pwr (Jun 24, 2003)

Hello, contract season.  Damon is playing a great this year, hope he keeps it up. Just keep feeding the ball to Zach.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Damon has had anything BUT a great season. He's racking up stats but he's hamstringing the team's chances to win while doing so.

It's early, and if his shooting comes around he might end up with his best season ever, but if he keeps playing at his current level (and I would expect him to shoot better but do the other things less well) the team will struggle to win.

Ed O.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

All this tells me is 2 things.

1. Obviously statistics don't mean everything. It still takes him way too long to get the offense started causing us more problems than what he's worth.

2. I don't think it's coincidence that he's in a contract year and playing a better all around game.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Good for Damon. I wouldn't take him back for the Veteran's minimum.

He still runs a voodoo offense, often just playing "hot potato" with the ball. No way should he have games like he has where he's taking 10-15 shots a game. 

Yesterday, Rafer Alston was having a field day on him.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Actually Damon had a pretty decent year last year as well. But, as Ed O. points out, there is a difference between good stats and his ability to be the quarterback of the team. This has always been the difference with him. He just does not know how to get the offense running. The long standing problem being delivering the ball to players with little to no time left on the clock to shoot.

I expect his shooting to go up as well. He is a fairly decent shooter.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

Damon will never be a good PG. His stats may look (assist to t/o) nice in the stat sheet, but what doesn't show up on that same sheet is his inability to run our offense. That will never change. I don't say that to knock him. If we were to acquire a PG, say J. Kidd, I could actually see Damon's skills (shooting-sometimes, and dribble penetration) being of good use. He does have the ability to score in bunches, he just can't do it every night, or even every other night. Also, he's still quick enough with the ball to give a defense headaches. I was reading P. Jackson's book last night and he commented on how he was cofortable with D-Fish because he is battle tested and he mentioned Damon's name as a guy Fish has done a good job with. He wouldn't have mentioned Damon's name at all, if he thought Damon was a bum. He has his nights, and on those nights you can jump on his back for quarters at a time. That said, he'll neve be a good PG.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

If he looks great to you,you don't watch much basketball.

He has never been,nor will be great.

I suggest you watch a youngster that will be great.
Dewayne Wade..is just a kid.

Right now,at this minute,Portland would be better off with EARL
BOYKINS.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

> Right now,at this minute,Portland would be better off with EARL BOYKINS



I love Earl the Pearl!!


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> If he looks great to you,you don't watch much basketball.
> 
> He has never been,nor will be great.
> ...


That's a little harsh, dont you think?:yes:


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kaydow</b>! That said, he'll neve be a good PG.


Ummm... he IS a good point guard. Period. When you've won rookie of the year, are top 10 in assists, #1 among starters for asst to turnover ratio, and have started for an NBA team that has made the WCF twice, and have had SEVERAL game winning shots, then yes... you are a GOOD point guard. I personally think he was on the bubble for All Star status last year. 

Jackie, address the facts. I was pointing out VERY SPECIFIC facts about his play. You can't argue with them.

As for Wade, I think he's amazing and when did I ever say otherwise?

As for Boykins, he is a pretty good player too. I don't see why comparing Damon to him would be considered a criticism. To be fair, Damon starts in this league, Boykins doesn't, and Damon gets more accomplished on the floor.

When a 5 foot 10 point guard grabs over FIVE REBOUNDS a night and has a 5.5 assist to turnover ratio, you have to give him some credit or you don't respect the game of basketball.

Go Blazers


----------



## MrWonderful (May 18, 2003)

*Speed, you've always been high on Damnon*

Truth is, his stats make him look much better than he really is. One time you pointed out that da Mouse is the 25th all-time best point guard in history, statistically. We all know that ain't so...

The problem with Damnon, stoned or otherwise, is that he just isn't smart enough to run the show, period.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

> Ummm... he IS a good point guard. Period. When you've won rookie of the year, are top 10 in assists, #1 among starters for asst to turnover ratio, and have started for an NBA team that has made the WCF twice, and have had SEVERAL game winning shots, then yes... you are a GOOD point guard. I personally think he was on the bubble for All Star status last year


Come on Nate. You're backing the wrong horse here. An All Star? In a league with T. Parker, Casell, S. Franchise, Mike Bibby, & S. Nash? Not to mention C Arroyo, A. Miller, G. Payton, and others who would all be considered All Stars before Damon.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

I never said Damon was one of the top 25 point guards of all time. I said he was one of the top 25 ASSISTS PER GAME men of all time. Which he WAS. But he fell of the list late last season. 

Incidentally, Van Exel is 20th, all time.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kaydow</b>!
> 
> 
> Come on Nate. You're backing the wrong horse here. An All Star? In a league with T. Parker, Casell, S. Franchise, Mike Bibby, & S. Nash? Not to mention C Arroyo, A. Miller, G. Payton, and others who would all be considered All Stars before Damon.


Parker and Damon's numbers were comparable last year. HELL, they're comparable THIS year. Damon gets many more assists and steals. Damon had comparable numbers to Nash too. They were very close.

And Damon shut down a lot of the guys you mentioned last year. Damon KILLED Gary Payton all last season. Damon SHUT DOWN Arroyo, Bibby, Francis, and Miller individual games last year.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. I mean, come on, GARY PAYTON? Did you see his clock get cleaned in the playoffs last year?


----------



## MrWonderful (May 18, 2003)

*Yo, Speed*

Yeah, you used that assists stat to back up your claim that Damnon is one of the top 25 pgs of all time. It's OK with me if you don't remember that, but I do. Don't sweat it, it's no big deal...


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

I never said he was one of the top 25 point guards of all time. Never. Ever.

I just said that he was one of the top 25 all time in assists per game. I NEVER ONCE inferred that into calling him one of the top 25 point guards of all time.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Damon will only flourish in an offense in which HE is the focus of the offense, where he can run, shoot, run shoot, etc. Unfortunately, he does this anyways (except the running part). 

Whe the strengh of our team is the low post and Damon is very very slow to dump the ball down low, its either his fault, cheek's fault, or both.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kaydow</b>!
> Come on Nate. You're backing the wrong horse here. An All Star? In a league with T. Parker, Casell, S. Franchise, Mike Bibby, & S. Nash? Not to mention C Arroyo, A. Miller, G. Payton, and others who would all be considered All Stars before Damon.


I have always and still do consider Mighty Mouse a better basketball player than any of those very good players you have mentioned.

Given the turmoil-filled teams and more recently idiotic coaching he has been saddled with, it is a miracle what he has accomplished.

Amazing with the pathetic non-performances of DA and Little Nicky that you can find time to criticize the only hard-working team player we have in the backcourt.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> 
> Amazing with the pathetic non-performances of DA and Little Nicky that you can find time to criticize the only hard-working team player we have in the backcourt.


how can someone find the time to criticize a player who's shooting 31%??? Since the only thing thats worse then that is his D and unwillingness/inability to move the ball, how can you be serious? Damon is not a very good NBA point, and now he's struggling. oh boy :| 

Unfortunately he's all Portland currently has. One more year.

STOMP


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Xericx</b>!
> Damon will only flourish in an offense in which HE is the focus of the offense, where he can run, shoot, run shoot, etc. Unfortunately, he does this anyways (except the running part).
> 
> Whe the strengh of our team is the low post and Damon is very very slow to dump the ball down low, its either his fault, cheek's fault, or both.


Actually the fault lies with our pathetic SG's and the fact that the entire league can afford to leave them wide open and sag down, clogging the middle and preventing any chance for an entry pass.

Again, DA and Little Nicky are a waste of space, but go ahead and nitpick Damon's inability to completely compensate for their total ineptitude.

With the passing lanes clogged and Zach's rebounding ability, the most efficient way to get him the ball is to jack up a clunker off the rim.

Until SAR is swapped for a decent SG and we get a real coach to replace WeakCheeks, Damon will have to carry the team as he did last year.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Ranks #9 in the NBA in Assists Per Game(7.3)

Ranks #15 in the NBA in Steals Per Game(1.83)

Ranks #4 in the NBA in Assists(44.0)

Ranks #13 in the NBA in Steals(11.0)

Ranks #2 in the NBA in Assists Per Turnover(5.5)

Ranks #15 in the NBA in Steals Per Turnover(1.38)

Ranks #17 in the NBA in Assists Per 48 Minutes(9.4)

And 5.3 rebounds per game.


Doesn't look to me like a guy who's "looking for his shot at the team's expense".

Doesn't look to me like a guy who plays "Toreador defense".

Looks to me like a top-notch Point Guard.

Maybe your glasses are fogged.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

go over to the main NBA board and ask a less biased crowd than you've got here about whether Damon is a top-notch PG.

we've pretty much been over the question of Damon's worthlessness before. 

in that thread, Maris pointed out the great ranking of Damon too. I shall once again point out the great rankings of Jason Terry, once again showing that any PG who dominates the ball and gets tons of minutes will look good in this arena:

Ranks #10 in the NBA in Three-Point Field-Goal Percentage(0.5) 
Ranks #8 in the NBA in Steals Per Game(2.13) 
Ranks #9 in the NBA in Three-Point Field Goals Made(14.0) 
Ranks #3 in the NBA in Steals(17.0)
Ranks #10 in the NBA in Assists Per Turnover(3.88) 
Ranks #3 in the NBA in Steals Per Turnover(2.13)
Ranks #18 in the NBA in Three-Point Field Goals Per 48 Minutes(3.05) 
Ranks #10 in the NBA in Steals Per 48 Minutes(3.71)

Maris will once again not refute this post. 

this argument isn't even an argument anymore. it's about three or four people (NathanLane, Maris, Blaze) who stubbornly cling to some weird version of reality where Damon is a great player because the stats say so even if their own homer eyes don't. 

myself, I'd rather throw myself in with the lot of Minstrel, Ed O, Blazer Ringbearer, STOMP, Hap, Storyteller, RG, Oldmangrouch, Trader Bob, etc. we're all Blazer fans. we're all generally pretty good posters not prone to too much homerism or unfounded extremist comments. we're all pretty much calling it as we see it--Damon is not a great point guard. when you factor in his salary, he's a complete disaster.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

You calling me a HOMER? What is that? And how is it any different then me calling you a HATER?:mrt:


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

> Damon is not a great point guard. when you factor in his salary, he's a complete disaster.


What is that supposed to mean? I belive his #'s were about the same as they are now when he signed that contract..So what's your POINT? Can you blame the man for signing it? If he were payed less would that make a difference? Really I dont see the point in bringing his contract up being that he's basically the same player as he was then...Just a little more mature...:yes:


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

I don't think Damon is a terrible PG. I don't think he's a good PG either. 

I think he's average.

I also think he's in the completely wrong system for a guy like him. 

The comparison to JT by theWanker was DEAD ON. JT can rack up stats, but was a TERRIBLE PG and one of the main reasons Atlanta couldn't claw its way out of the cellar. It is the same reason why Portland is having such a hard time clawing its way to wins with a frontline that rivals any in basketball.

Stats never tell the real story. They paint a broad picture.

For instance - Reef hasn't gotten a lot of assists this year - yet he is one of the better passers on the team and passes a LOT more than Zach Randolph. But, Randolph is averaging more assists ... why? Because Reef is making the first pass which sets up the second pass ... but the stats don't reflect it. 

Why are Damon's assists high? Damon has DA and Randolph ... two guys that will pop a jumper without qualms. That helps assists. Another thing is that he often gets the ball to a player that only has time to get off a quick shot, that leads to more assists. Finally, he runs the break well, which leads to an easy dunk half the time.

If you were to look objectively at Saturday's game ... Damon missed 5 or 6 EASY assists that a good PG sees. But, he doesn't play PG in that regard... he tries to score. 

Play.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Saying Damon Stoudamire is currently having a good season is LUDICROUS! He is shooting *31 % from the floor!* That is pathetic. Will it improve? Geez I hope so, but to claim he is having a good season before it does is ridiculous.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
> I shall once again point out the great rankings of Jason Terry, once again showing that any PG who dominates the ball and gets tons of minutes will look good in this arena:
> 
> Ranks #10 in the NBA in Three-Point Field-Goal Percentage(0.5)
> ...


Sure I will.

Because your stats prove my point, not disprove it.

Jason Terry's stats show he is an excellent defender and 3 pt shooter, a notion that is widely asccepted around the league.

Also a very good ballhandler.

His ABSENCE in the high ratings for assists suggest he is only a so-so distributer of the ball, or possibly even somewhat of a ballhog. Not someone you want at PG.

Damon's stats show just the opposite, that he is one of the best at getting his teammates the ball when and where they need it to score.

His career FG% is .410, about average for a PG currently in the league and as good or better than our current SG's (.413 DA and .406 NVE). SG's are expected to shoot much better since that is their primary purpose.

Note to tlong: Quoting his .310 FG% average over the LAST 6 GAMES only makes you look extremely foolish and casts doubt on the credibility of your other posts.

Damon also beats both DA and NVE in career averages for 3 pt % and rebounding (astounding, considering his height).

Again, if your going to HATE, at least direct it at the appropriate targets.

Package SAR, DA AND Little Nicky for a good SG and a strong backup C/PF, give Telfair the PT he needs to become good, and we have a title contender.

Well, if we get a real coach to lead them we do.


----------



## Kuskid (Aug 18, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> Note to tlong: Quoting his .310 FG% average over the LAST 6 GAMES only makes you look extremely foolish and casts doubt on the credibility of your other posts.





> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> Ranks #9 in the NBA in Assists Per Game(7.3)
> 
> Ranks #15 in the NBA in Steals Per Game(1.83)
> ...


Weird, isn't that kinda exactly what you did here?


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kuskid</b>!
> Weird, isn't that kinda exactly what you did here?


No, it is not.

As discussed in this thread, NathanLane posted those stats to bolster career stats he has posted in previous threads.

Mighty Mouse is an excellent PG now and throughout his entire career.

Try to keep up.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> Sure I will.
> 
> Because your stats prove my point, not disprove it.


I guess I'm confused. I don't see it that way at all.



> Jason Terry's stats show he is an excellent defender and 3 pt shooter, a notion that is widely asccepted around the league.


In what universe is JT considered even a pathetic defender? He is considered to be one of the poorer defenders at the PG spot and he's too short to be the SG that he really is.

He overplays the ball, which leads to steals, but also leads to open shots and great ball movement. 

Please, do some research before you say things like that. 

JT is NOT and NEVER HAS been known as a good NBA defender. He was known as a good NCAA defender, but a sub-par NBA level defender.

Play.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> 
> 
> Note to tlong: Quoting his .310 FG% average over the LAST 6 GAMES only makes you look extremely foolish and casts doubt on the credibility of your other posts.


That's got to be one of the most uninformed comments I've seen posted this season. Why wouldn't I quote the 31% FG shooting? *FYI...the season is 6 games old so far for the Blazers! * I was refuting the thread contention that Damon is having a good year. Am I supposed to "imagine" some other shooting statistics that haven't occured yet? *Hello?*


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Maris-

Jason Terry has never played on a decent defensive NBA team. ever. this is not a coincidence. nobody (except, apparently, you) regards him as anything other than an extremely mediocre guard. 

if Jason Terry and Damon Stoudamire are good guards, I want to see who on the following list you would put them ahead of: 

Jason Kidd, NJ
S. Marbury, NYK/PHO
Steve Nash, DAL
Baron Davis, NOR
Sam Cassell, MIN
Dwyane Wade, MI
Eric Snow, PHI
J. Williams, MEM
Kirk Hinrich, CHI
Steve Francis, HOU
Jeff McInnis, CLE/POR
Andre Miller, DEN
LeBron James, CLE
C. Billups, DET
Tony Parker, SAS
Gary Payton, LAL
Mike Bibby, SAC
J. Crawford, CHI
Carlos Arroyo, UTH
Earl Watson, MEM
Rafer Alston, MIA
Mike James, BOS/DET
Raul Lopez, UTH
Earl Boykins, DEN

at the very best, you can put him somewhere in the middle of that pack. certainly neither are better than Bibby, Wade, Watson, Alston, Marbury, Kidd, Francis, Cassel, Parker, Davis, Williams, Billups, Boykins or Nash. 

guess what that makes them? yup. mediocre. at best.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>tlong</b>!
> That's got to be one of the most uninformed comments I've seen posted this season. Why wouldn't I quote the 31% FG shooting? *FYI...the season is 6 games old so far for the Blazers! * I was refuting the thread contention that Damon is having a good year. Am I supposed to "imagine" some other shooting statistics that haven't occured yet? *Hello?*


Well, see, the shooting percentage discredits his assertation, thus it is an "extremely doolish" comment -

yet the thread is all about Damon's year. How else are we to judge his performance?

I would assume he is judging his performance on the same 6 games that Damon shot 31% as well, at least I would hope so.

Maris's arguments are always a little lacking.

Play.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> I guess I'm confused.


No, as always you just ignore the obvious when it doesn't suit you.



> In what universe is JT considered even a pathetic defender? He is considered to be one of the poorer defenders at the PG spot and he's too short to be the SG that he really is. He overplays the ball, which leads to steals, but also leads to open shots and great ball movement.


Kind of like Ron Artest?

I believe I stated he was more of a SG than a PG, but his new team, the Mavs, never known for their defense, are off to a 7-1 start. His combination of steals and 3's fits perfect for them.

Sometimes the best defense is a strong offense.

But this thread is about what an exceptional player Damon is, not about JT at all. As usual, when you can't defend your position you try a diversion, like the Republicans always do.

Only works with fools.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, see, the shooting percentage discredits his assertation, thus it is an "extremely doolish" comment -
> ...


Okay, I'll give you his 6 game shooting slump and take his phenomenal performance across the rest of the stat board.

I win!

And that "Play" thing you do at the end of your posts comes across as 3rd graderish, but go ahead and do it if it makes you feel cool.:yes:


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> No, as always you just ignore the obvious when it doesn't suit you.


I guess it isn't that obvious to me, and with the amount of flack coming at you from all angles ... it looks like no one else finds it extremely obvious either.



> Kind of like Ron Artest?


Ron Artest? What does Ron Artest have ANYTHING to do with JT?

Did you just randomly pull out a name and spew it out because it made you happy. 

Okay, I can do it too ... Kind of like Natalie Portman? Kind of like Selma Hayek? 

Man, that's fun ... but it really doesn't add to the argument.



> I believe I stated he was more of a SG than a PG, but his new team, the Mavs, never known for their defense, are off to a 7-1 start. His combination of steals and 3's fits perfect for them.


Actually, their 7-1 start has little to do with JT. He's coming off the bench in limited minutes. His statistics are due to one amazing game wherein he got 4 steals and 11 assists. 

Seriously man, trying to relate JTs presence to the Mavs 7-1 start is just trying too hard.



> But this thread is about what an exceptional player Damon is, not about JT at all. As usual, when you can't defend your position you try a diversion, like the Republicans always do.


(A) Actually, this thread started as a talk about what a great SEASON Damon is having, and since he isn't actually having a great season you turned it into what a great PG he is. As you say: "Try to keep up"
(B) The republican comment is actually against board policy and just absurd in the context it was used.



> Only works with fools.


Hmmm... this was completely random.

Play.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> 
> 
> Okay, I'll give you his 6 game shooting slump and take his phenomenal performance across the rest of the stat board.
> ...


Actually you lose. The next time somebody is recognized as having a great year in the NBA while shooting 31% from the field will be the first time.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> Okay, I'll give you his 6 game shooting slump and take his phenomenal performance across the rest of the stat board.


Except that his "phenominal" performance hasn't led to much except a .500 winning percentage with one of the best frontlines in all of basketball. 

Also, getting stats are not what basketball is about. (well, unless your name is Zach Randolph) Stoudamire is in the best position to make his teammates better, and he doesn't do it. I could care less if he had 4 assists ... if he found was to get the ball to the right guy. 

I normally defend Stoudamire, but he's not a GREAT PG. He's serviceable, mainly because (outside of his shooting too much) he doesn't make mistakes. 

But, he also doesn't make the right passes either. 



> I win!


You win? I didn't know this was a winnable argument. I thought it was more opinion based, but if it makes you feel better.



> And that "Play" thing you do at the end of your posts comes across as 3rd graderish, but go ahead and do it if it makes you feel cool.:yes:


Yeah, you know what - when I first came here, people said that when they really couldn't argue valid points. It seems the same holds true now. 

It isn't done to impress or be cool or anything. I am just used to signing my name at the end ... it's habit. If you like it or dislike it, it really doesn't matter to me. So, I guess either way, you better learn a good way to deal with it.

Play.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

How could anybody say he is excellent..
Dewayne Wade is excellent.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> 
> Except that his "phenominal" performance hasn't led to much except a .500 winning percentage with one of the best frontlines in all of basketball.
> ...




And I think you are thinking od the zach randolph of last year....when he wanted the big contract. This year Zach has been much better about sharing with his friends.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

I've made my points, you've ducked around them and we're both wasting time.

I'll agree to disagree with you and let it go at that.

Nothing personal, I just don't understand all the hatred for Damon on this board. I don't encounter it anywhere but here.

Maybe this board should be renamed IHATEDAMON.NET.

GO BLAZERS!


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Maris what is it about Damon that you like? I mean as a point guard it's your job to get the offense going, get easy baskets for your teammates and apply pressure on guards trying to set up their offense. Damon really doesn't do any of these thigs even adequately. 
I'm not saying he isn't a good player, he's just not a good point guard. He's too short to be a shooting guard, so really he has no possition except point guard. That's the problem. Damon can surely shoot the ball better than he has, and does seem to have some assists every game, but he lacks so much in the area of leadership, and getting his teammates involved.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

I don't get why some people have a hard time spotting the difference between disliking a players game, and "hating" him.

I would bet you good money no one here actually hates Damon (outside someone just responding to this post to prove a point). Disliking a persons game, and thinking that he doesn't actually help this team as much as some people who like his game think he does, isn't hating. Disliking the fact he's not a good shooter on a consistent enough basis and stating that, is not hating. 

It's fairly easy to see the difference between these feelings. You can dislike someones game, and not hate them. And you can hate someone, and not dislike their game.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> Dewayne Wade is excellent.



We're talking basketball here.:makeout:

 please take your own advice and stick to talking basketball, and don't make implied comments about posters.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mediocre man</b>!
> Maris what is it about Damon that you like? I mean as a point guard it's your job to get the offense going, get easy baskets for your teammates and apply pressure on guards trying to set up their offense. Damon really doesn't do any of these thigs even adequately.


As NathanLane pointed out and backed up with statistics, i.e. factual numbers, he gets more assists than most players which only happens when you "get the offense going, get easy baskets for your teammates".

As NathanLane pointed out and backed up with statistics, i.e. factual numbers, he gets more steals than most players which for a PG usually happens when "you apply pressure on guards trying to set up their offense."



> He's too short to be a shooting guard, so really he has no position except point guard.


And yet he out-rebounds both of our SG's and shoots a better 3 pt % than either of them.

Kind of hard to understand your logic there.

Maybe you meant to say "Damon defies belief by playing better than much more physically gifted individuals."


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hap, You've got to be kidding! 

I've implied nothing.

Quite clear you've let your personal feelings about my basketball opinions cloud your duties on this board in my case.

My lightly humorous comment did not violate any of the rules and certainly could not have offended anyone in any way.

It pales in comparison to many, many of your posted comments.

Sorry if my support of the Blazers Team Captain has riled some people but that's no reason to flex your muscles to "put me in my place".


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> 
> 
> Hap, You've got to be kidding!
> ...


I was going on the advice of another mod, not my own.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> I was going on the advice of another mod, not my own.


What the heck does that mean?

Another mod didn't dare to delete my post so he had you do it?

I'd like to know if I somehow stepped "over the line" as I have made a concerted effort to abide by the rules here, but I'd also like to be able to have a little fun and kid around with other posters like you and everyone else is allowed to do.

Just trying to keep it light and pleasant while still posting my basketball opinions.

You can PM me if youhave any clarification if you wish.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> 
> 
> What the heck does that mean?
> ...


actually, what it means is a mod from another forum gave me advice on how to edit something here.



> I'd like to know if I somehow stepped "over the line" as I have made a concerted effort to abide by the rules here, but I'd also like to be able to have a little fun and kid around with other posters like you and everyone else is allowed to do.
> 
> Just trying to keep it light and pleasant while still posting my basketball opinions.
> 
> You can PM me if youhave any clarification if you wish.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

Jeez, I haven't seen anything this divisive since the election results from Ohio....

Can we at least agree that Stoudamire is having a pretty good year, apart from his shooting slump and his normally "challenged" defense? 

I'm impressed with Damon's statistics, but honestly, in the bigger picture, I'm annoyed that the Blazers lost three games on the road by less than ten combined points. That's not all Damon's fault.

Personally, I'd put Stoudamire in the middle of the pack of current-day point guards - he's no Mike Bibby or Steve Francis, but I'd take him over Jamal Tinsley or Charlie Ward.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> 
> 
> As NathanLane pointed out and backed up with statistics, i.e. factual numbers, he gets more assists than most players which only happens when you "get the offense going, get easy baskets for your teammates".
> ...




All I'm saying is statistics can be very misleading. For instance did you know Zach Randolph....who everyone says is a horible defensive player only averages 1/2 less steal per game than Damon? Does Zach pressure anyone? 

Stats are misleading, Damon gets a lot of assists because he passes the ball with no time on the clock forcing the player to take a shot. Damon can't finish a drive to save his life. He refuses to pass and can't seem to get the ball up. He doesn't turn the ball over a lot because he can't create....Again stats are misleading.

And as I've said I don't think Damon is a bad player, just not a good point guard. And that's something this team needs in the worst way.


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

Damon may be our best shooting guard at the moment. With more height he would be a shooting guard in this league. I'd like to see him and Telfair on the floor together.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Target</b>!
> Damon may be our best shooting guard at the moment. With more height he would be a shooting guard in this league. I'd like to see him and Telfair on the floor together.


I disagree. DA hasn't been shooting the ball well, but he's still been at least as good as Damon.

Defensively, it hasn't been close. DA's played pretty well against players like Richardson.

Damon at the 2 would be even a bigger mess than NVE (or DA!) at the SG spot.

Ed O.


----------



## RG (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Target</b>!
> I'd like to see him and Telfair on the floor together.


Me Too! I just hope that when it happens Telfair is the only one wearing a Blazer uniform.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Public Defender</b>!
> Personally, I'd put Stoudamire in the middle of the pack of current-day point guards - he's no Mike Bibby or Steve Francis, but I'd take him over Jamal Tinsley or Charlie Ward.


I am not a huge Tinsley fan, but Wow. Really? You would take Damon over Jamal Tinsley?

The starting PG for a 61 win team.

Thriller....Thriller...errr, I mean 61 wins... 61 wins. It rolls off the tounge like sweet nectar. We Blazer fans can only wax nostalgic over all that winning.

Isn't that what a floor general is supposed to do? Help lead their team to victories. In his (and Damon's case) get the ball to superior players when and where they need it, and get the heck out of the way. Push the ball up the court and down the throat of the defense if they slip and give you a seam. Knock down the wide-open J, and play a little D.

And besides all that, Tinsley seems to have developed something approaching an outside shot last season - 37% from three. He is bigger and stronger than Damon. Younger. Gets paid less. His stats were approaching that of Damon last season. Tinsley played fewer minutes than Damon because he was coming off an injury, the Pacers had a good backup and Portland didn't. On a per minute basis, Tinsley's overall stats are superior to Damon's.

Why do you prefer Damon?


----------



## Buck Williams (May 16, 2004)

DAMON RULES hes amazing to wach hes so quick and is really not as bad of a passer as people make him out to be


----------



## go_robot (Sep 7, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Blazerben4</b>!
> DAMON RULES hes amazing to wach hes so quick and is really not as bad of a passer as people make him out to be


It's not that he is unskilled at passing the ball. It's that he doesn't start the offense quick enough. He dribbles around and dumps it into the post with 6 seconds left on the shot clock. That's the problem.

And no, Damon doesn't 'rule'


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Masbee</b>!
> I am not a huge Tinsley fan, but Wow. Really? You would take Damon over Jamal Tinsley?


Yes, really. 



> The starting PG for a 61 win team.


Starting, perhaps, but was not always given the most meaningful minutes in important games. Sort of like crediting Stoudamire for the two trips to the conference finals without giving it up for Greg Anthony and Scottie Pippen... 



> Thriller....Thriller...errr, I mean 61 wins... 61 wins. It rolls off the tounge like sweet nectar. We Blazer fans can only wax nostalgic over all that winning. Isn't that what a floor general is supposed to do? Help lead their team to victories.


Give Stoudamire a center like Jermaine O'Neal, a shooting guard like Reggie Miller, a perimeter defender like Ron Artest, bench scoring from a guy like Al Harrington, and I could see him getting 61 wins with the Pacers. 



> In his (and Damon's case) get the ball to superior players when and where they need it, and get the heck out of the way. Push the ball up the court and down the throat of the defense if they slip and give you a seam. Knock down the wide-open J, and play a little D.


It's a team game and while I'll concede that Damon's not that great at running the offense, I have to blame Maurice Cheeks for not having much of an offense, and give some credit to the superior coaching - and again, superior teammates - belonging to Tinsley and the Pacers. Damon can make an entry pass if there's movement in the offense - he can also knock down open shots if the players swing the ball quickly enough and the offensive scheme is responsive enough. There are problems in that thar offense. 



> And besides all that, Tinsley seems to have developed something approaching an outside shot last season - 37% from three. He is bigger and stronger than Damon. Younger. Gets paid less. His stats were approaching that of Damon last season. Tinsley played fewer minutes than Damon because he was coming off an injury, the Pacers had a good backup and Portland didn't. On a per minute basis, Tinsley's overall stats are superior to Damon's.
> 
> Why do you prefer Damon?


He's bigger and stronger than Damon, yes, that's true. He's also more turnover prone, a worse decision-maker, slower, and less dependable when the game's on the line. As for shooting, Damon can have break-out games, hit clutch shots, be a difference-maker, and act as a leader on the floor. He seldom makes big mistakes in clutch situations. I can't say the same thing about Jamal Tinsley. 

The money to me doesn't matter. Tinsley's next contract will be relatively large, while Stoudamire's will be much smaller, or else will simply balance a sign-and-trade for some better talent. Mind you, I don't think Tinsley's a horrible point guard, he's just sub-par, whereas Stoudamire in today's league, is average. Sort of a silly argument to have, in a sense, but I brought it up. :sigh:


----------

