Steve Blake Discussion: Traded To Warriors

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby gcclaker on Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:46 am

^I prefer Chucky Atkins...
No siggie...
User avatar
gcclaker
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 9:35 am
Location: Laker Cyber Space

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby khmrP on Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:50 am

his 3fg % has gone from 37% to 33% and his overall fg% is sub 35% over his 2yr stint here....this "good shooter" stuff is all rep. As far as making the safe play and playing his role, thats fine but is it asking to much to expect a "lil bit" more? As D is concern I dont see it, he still gets lite by most PG, even Fisher got off shots with ease against him, the SG defense I ignore cause thats not his fault potato head thinks he can defend that position for god knows why.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10409
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby therealdeal on Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:55 am

gcclaker wrote:
borri wrote:Blake played pretty darn well before he injured his ribs. As long as he's anywhere near that level i'd be ecstatic.

Yes...very true. He struggled adapting to the Tri. Once Blake was playing in a traditional offense, he was able to play more comfortably until the injury.

His stats before the injury:
24:19 minutes/g
7.25 ppg
2.83 apg
1.92 rpg
0.5 stls pg
40 FG% (33/82)
35 3PT% (17/48)
57 FT% (4/7)
1.58 fouls pg
1.67 tos

Not bad numbers. I wanted to look them up after you guys brought them up. I mean, he'll see those minutes or a little less behind Nash this season. If he can contribute that... maybe one more assist per game considering he'll have much better assist options... That's enough for me. That's enough to win really.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39944
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby puffyusaf#2 on Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:59 am

gcclaker wrote:^I prefer Chucky Atkins...

hell lets roll with Jordan Farmar he would shoot as much as he could.
For what it's worth, the Lakers also clinched the Pacific Division, an achievement Bryant dismissed by saying "We don't hang divisions." No, only the big NBA championship banners are considered wall-worthy for the Lakers.
User avatar
puffyusaf#2

 
Posts: 30487
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 3:15 pm
Location: Chasing the dream to an Oscar

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby therealdeal on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:01 am

khmrP wrote:his 3fg % has gone from 37% to 33% and his overall fg% is sub 35% over his 2yr stint here....this "good shooter" stuff is all rep. As far as making the safe play and playing his role, thats fine but is it asking to much to expect a "lil bit" more? As D is concern I dont see it, he still gets lite by most PG, even Fisher got off shots with ease against him, the SG defense I ignore cause thats not his fault potato head thinks he can defend that position for god knows why.

His overall field goal percentage as a Laker is exactly 37% (211/574).

This "good shooter" stuff is in fact not all rep. He's been a good shooter as a Laker. His 3 point percentage as a Laker has been exactly 36% (126/351). That's not great, but it is good. We've all been excited about acquiring Meeks and he shot 37% from deep last season. Jamison shot 34% from deep last season (and has done so throughout his career) and we're excited about his spacing.

Like I posted on the previous page in spot up opportunities Blake has shot 36% or so from deep. That's not bad and that'll get the job done.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39944
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby khmrP on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:03 am

puffyusaf#2 wrote:
gcclaker wrote:^I prefer Chucky Atkins...

hell lets roll with Jordan Farmar he would shoot as much as he could.


farmar #'s from last season 46% from the field and 44% from 3's, took 8fga to Blake 5fga, not exactly "chuking" there
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10409
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby khmrP on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:12 am

therealdeal wrote:
khmrP wrote:his 3fg % has gone from 37% to 33% and his overall fg% is sub 35% over his 2yr stint here....this "good shooter" stuff is all rep. As far as making the safe play and playing his role, thats fine but is it asking to much to expect a "lil bit" more? As D is concern I dont see it, he still gets lite by most PG, even Fisher got off shots with ease against him, the SG defense I ignore cause thats not his fault potato head thinks he can defend that position for god knows why.

His overall field goal percentage as a Laker is exactly 37% (211/574).

This "good shooter" stuff is in fact not all rep. He's been a good shooter as a Laker. His 3 point percentage as a Laker has been exactly 36% (126/351). That's not great, but it is good. We've all been excited about acquiring Meeks and he shot 37% from deep last season. Jamison shot 34% from deep last season (and has done so throughout his career) and we're excited about his spacing.

Like I posted on the previous page in spot up opportunities Blake has shot 36% or so from deep. That's not bad and that'll get the job done.


well I guess the standard of being known as "shooter" is pretty low these days than.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10409
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby therealdeal on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:23 am

khmrP wrote:
puffyusaf#2 wrote:
gcclaker wrote:^I prefer Chucky Atkins...

hell lets roll with Jordan Farmar he would shoot as much as he could.


farmar #'s from last season 46% from the field and 44% from 3's, took 8fga to Blake 5fga, not exactly "chuking" there

3 field goal attempts per game is actually a lot. Farmar played in only 39 games last season and somehow shot the ball 315 times. Blake played in 53 games last season and only shot the ball 268 times. Somehow in 14 more games he shot the ball almost 50 less times than Farmar.

Chucking? I don't know. But he definitely shot the ball a hell of a lot more than Blake did.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39944
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby therealdeal on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:27 am

khmrP wrote:
therealdeal wrote:
khmrP wrote:his 3fg % has gone from 37% to 33% and his overall fg% is sub 35% over his 2yr stint here....this "good shooter" stuff is all rep. As far as making the safe play and playing his role, thats fine but is it asking to much to expect a "lil bit" more? As D is concern I dont see it, he still gets lite by most PG, even Fisher got off shots with ease against him, the SG defense I ignore cause thats not his fault potato head thinks he can defend that position for god knows why.

His overall field goal percentage as a Laker is exactly 37% (211/574).

This "good shooter" stuff is in fact not all rep. He's been a good shooter as a Laker. His 3 point percentage as a Laker has been exactly 36% (126/351). That's not great, but it is good. We've all been excited about acquiring Meeks and he shot 37% from deep last season. Jamison shot 34% from deep last season (and has done so throughout his career) and we're excited about his spacing.

Like I posted on the previous page in spot up opportunities Blake has shot 36% or so from deep. That's not bad and that'll get the job done.


well I guess the standard of being known as "shooter" is pretty low these days than.

Oh come on now. Is that the best response you have, man? I provided some good evidence and you just give me a sarcastic response... No bueno, my friend.

I don't know what you are expecting really from a "shooter". If you're expecting over 40%, there were only 22 players in the entire league that shot that well from deep in 2012. And many of them shot muh less than Blake did. In fact of the top 15 guys, 9 of them shot under 100 threes (In fact 7 of them shot 60 or less). Would it be great if he shot better? Yes, of course. But he's a bench guy here for a reason. I don't know that anyone can realistically expect more from the guy.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39944
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby khmrP on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:29 am

therealdeal wrote:
khmrP wrote:
puffyusaf#2 wrote:
gcclaker wrote:^I prefer Chucky Atkins...

hell lets roll with Jordan Farmar he would shoot as much as he could.


farmar #'s from last season 46% from the field and 44% from 3's, took 8fga to Blake 5fga, not exactly "chuking" there

3 field goal attempts per game is actually a lot. Farmar played in only 39 games last season and somehow shot the ball 315 times. Blake played in 53 games last season and only shot the ball 268 times. Somehow in 14 more games he shot the ball almost 50 less times than Farmar.

Chucking? I don't know. But he definitely shot the ball a hell of a lot more than Blake did.


dont see it as a bad thing with those type of %, if Blake had that kind of #'s I wouldn't care if he shot it 10x a game. Anyways, I'm certainly not the kind to want a player on our team to do bad but I dont share any of your optimissim in regards to Blake, I hope he proves me wrong like Odom did, I hated his game and his #'s the during the 1st couple of seasons when we got him.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10409
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby khmrP on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:30 am

therealdeal wrote:
khmrP wrote:
therealdeal wrote:
khmrP wrote:his 3fg % has gone from 37% to 33% and his overall fg% is sub 35% over his 2yr stint here....this "good shooter" stuff is all rep. As far as making the safe play and playing his role, thats fine but is it asking to much to expect a "lil bit" more? As D is concern I dont see it, he still gets lite by most PG, even Fisher got off shots with ease against him, the SG defense I ignore cause thats not his fault potato head thinks he can defend that position for god knows why.

His overall field goal percentage as a Laker is exactly 37% (211/574).

This "good shooter" stuff is in fact not all rep. He's been a good shooter as a Laker. His 3 point percentage as a Laker has been exactly 36% (126/351). That's not great, but it is good. We've all been excited about acquiring Meeks and he shot 37% from deep last season. Jamison shot 34% from deep last season (and has done so throughout his career) and we're excited about his spacing.

Like I posted on the previous page in spot up opportunities Blake has shot 36% or so from deep. That's not bad and that'll get the job done.


well I guess the standard of being known as "shooter" is pretty low these days than.

Oh come on now. Is that the best response you have, man? I provided some good evidence and you just give me a sarcastic response... No bueno, my friend.

I don't know what you are expecting really from a "shooter". If you're expecting over 40%, there were only 22 players in the entire league that shot that well from deep in 2012. And many of them shot muh less than Blake did. In fact of the top 15 guys, 9 of them shot under 100 threes (In fact 7 of them shot 60 or less). Would it be great if he shot better? Yes, of course. But he's a bench guy here for a reason. I don't know that anyone can realistically expect more from the guy.


37% from the field overall is NOT what I consider a shooter, his 3pt% is fine cause thats the typical league avg. anyways.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10409
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby therealdeal on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:35 am

khmrP wrote:dont see it as a bad thing with those type of %, if Blake had that kind of #'s I wouldn't care if he shot it 10x a game. Anyways, I'm certainly not the kind to want a player on our team to do bad but I dont share any of your optimissim in regards to Blake, I hope he proves me wrong like Odom did, I hated his game and his #'s the during the 1st couple of seasons when we got him.

Those percentages are also inflated because of the limited games he played. I'll give it to Jordan, he played well, and now that we're out of the Triangle I think he'd do well here. But there's no denying he shoots more than he should sometimes. Is that better than Blake's shooting less than he should sometimes? I don't know. I don't think so to be honest. I think they're both bad in their own ways. If there were a player that mixed Jordan's young explosiveness with Blake's savvy and grit... that guy'd be great.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39944
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby therealdeal on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:43 am

khmrP wrote:37% from the field overall is NOT what I consider a shooter, his 3pt% is fine cause thats the typical league avg. anyways.

37% from the field isn't really that important. A shooter is defined by what he does away from the basket and really beyond the three point line. A scorer on the other hand wouldn't be very good if he shot 37% from the field and had no redeeming qualities.

Blake's 36% from deep is good. I think it's above average, but not great. Maybe a C+ or a B-. And just because I've been defending him doesn't mean I don't see all of his faults. He's not the greatest player for us to have backing up Nash, but it could be worse. All he needs is an outlook change, to be more aggressive, and he'd be a fine backup.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39944
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby puffyusaf#2 on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:48 am

khmrP wrote:
puffyusaf#2 wrote:
gcclaker wrote:^I prefer Chucky Atkins...

hell lets roll with Jordan Farmar he would shoot as much as he could.


farmar #'s from last season 46% from the field and 44% from 3's, took 8fga to Blake 5fga, not exactly "chuking" there


Ahh the stats race. Realdeal already pointed out the particulars so I won't rehash that at all. Lets just talk about the little things besides Farmar playing less games and less minutes. He wanted to be a starter and considered himself well above his level of play thus he is going to take shots from Kobe, Drew (now Dwight) and Pau just because he feels he should. His decision making has always been suspect and, if memory serves me right, he never fed the ball into the post. WHich brings me to another often criticized point from Lakers fans; feeding the ball into the post. Who gets the guys the ball on our team? Who played the best with the cutters like Barnes? Who didn't force their game and just played how the team wanted? That would be Blake. Do you really think Farmar would come in and do that?

The elephant in the room you ask? He played on the NJ Nets and he was so good he is getting waived by the Hawks. Come on now, Blake was on the floor late in games because he does his job and isn't afraid of the moment. Hate is simply hate.
For what it's worth, the Lakers also clinched the Pacific Division, an achievement Bryant dismissed by saying "We don't hang divisions." No, only the big NBA championship banners are considered wall-worthy for the Lakers.
User avatar
puffyusaf#2

 
Posts: 30487
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 3:15 pm
Location: Chasing the dream to an Oscar

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby Thenextgreat on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:51 am

If Blake had hit that corner 3 would we have won that series? Would people look at Blake differently today...what a difference one shot could of made
User avatar
Thenextgreat

 
Posts: 2132
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:07 am

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby khmrP on Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:06 pm

puffyusaf#2 wrote:The elephant in the room you ask? He played on the NJ Nets and he was so good he is getting waived by the Hawks. Come on now, Blake was on the floor late in games because he does his job and isn't afraid of the moment. Hate is simply hate.


Blake was on the court cause Session forgot how to shoot. True stats are misleading at times, since these 2 players do different things for their teams, just to show you how you said "farmar would shoot more" well you were right, he did but he was justified for doing so. While Farmar did get hurt, its not like his production would've fallen off the cliff, the time he did play he still out produce Blake within the same range of minutes. As far as your other stuff, thats not pertinent to the conversation, what he wants vs. what he got and being waived by Atl has nothing to do with his overall production compared to Blake. IF blake could be waived w/o penalty like Farmar, I'm pretty sure Mitch wouldn't hesitate to do so.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10409
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby nthydro on Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:03 pm

TIME wrote:Blake is going to benefit tremendously from watching Nash every night. I think that he will absorb a measure of Nashtiness by observational osmosis. :man12:

That's my theory and I'm sticking with it. :deal:


Fixed.
nthydro

 
Posts: 1385
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby nthydro on Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:11 pm

borri wrote:
nthydro wrote:
borri wrote:
Psychobroker wrote:
LooN3y wrote: he needs the balls in his hands to be effective.


:man10:


Sometimes i need my balls in my hands to be "effective" too. :man10: :man12:


I hope it's your own...


Of course....the part about "my balls". Reading comprehension, a lost art. LOL. :man12:


That's why I said "hope"

Sometimes people get possessive with other people's properties. :man1:
nthydro

 
Posts: 1385
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby karacha on Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:06 pm

puffyusaf#2 wrote:
gcclaker wrote:^I prefer Chucky Atkins...

hell lets roll with Jordan Farmar he would shoot as much as he could.


Actually, players like Farmar and young Chucky would probably fit better with this Laker team. IMO, of course. This way you'd have 3 trigger happy players on the bench.

I have always been a Blake supporter actually. He does play alright D (at least as much as you can -- or are allowed to -- play D against speedy PGs) and he also takes care of the ball. Other then that.... he doesn't do much at all, good or bad. He usually won't win or lose the game for you (save for hitting or missing that rare clutch 3-pt shot) and won't do anything stupid either.

But yeah... someone like Farmar would bring less D, but more shooting and penetration, and when you have players like Metta/Kobe/Meeks/Howard or even Pau behind you, you can afford to play sub-par defense most of the time. But you will have to make up for it by not being afraid to chuck the ball. Farmar and Atkins did not have a problem with that.

I know Chucky was :atkins: ... yeah. But Chucky was at least a 45%/39% player for his career, and when he was younger (and not playing hurt) he was a pretty decent scorer.
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37443
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby dj vitus on Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:24 pm

therealdeal wrote:
khmrP wrote:
therealdeal wrote:
khmrP wrote:his 3fg % has gone from 37% to 33% and his overall fg% is sub 35% over his 2yr stint here....this "good shooter" stuff is all rep. As far as making the safe play and playing his role, thats fine but is it asking to much to expect a "lil bit" more? As D is concern I dont see it, he still gets lite by most PG, even Fisher got off shots with ease against him, the SG defense I ignore cause thats not his fault potato head thinks he can defend that position for god knows why.

His overall field goal percentage as a Laker is exactly 37% (211/574).

This "good shooter" stuff is in fact not all rep. He's been a good shooter as a Laker. His 3 point percentage as a Laker has been exactly 36% (126/351). That's not great, but it is good. We've all been excited about acquiring Meeks and he shot 37% from deep last season. Jamison shot 34% from deep last season (and has done so throughout his career) and we're excited about his spacing.

Like I posted on the previous page in spot up opportunities Blake has shot 36% or so from deep. That's not bad and that'll get the job done.


well I guess the standard of being known as "shooter" is pretty low these days than.

Oh come on now. Is that the best response you have, man? I provided some good evidence and you just give me a sarcastic response... No bueno, my friend.

I don't know what you are expecting really from a "shooter". If you're expecting over 40%, there were only 22 players in the entire league that shot that well from deep in 2012. And many of them shot muh less than Blake did. In fact of the top 15 guys, 9 of them shot under 100 threes (In fact 7 of them shot 60 or less). Would it be great if he shot better? Yes, of course. But he's a bench guy here for a reason. I don't know that anyone can realistically expect more from the guy.

I just realized Duhon was one of them, and he shot over 100. :man1:
"Why are they blocking out all the good stuff? They let Sarah Jessica Parker's face on TV and she looks like a foot!!"
User avatar
dj vitus

 
Posts: 9349
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 6:59 pm
Location: Walnut, CA by way of Laaaas Vegas!

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby therealdeal on Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:26 pm

:man10:

That's more a testament to what I said than anything else.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39944
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby therealdeal on Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:29 am

Steve's averages as a Laker:
FG%- 37% (211/574)
3PT%- 36% (126/351)
FT%- 82% (47/57)
Mins- 21:35
Pts- 4.53
Rbds- 1.83 (1.61 Def./0.21 Off.)
Asts- 2.61
Tos- 1.10
Stls- 0.6
Blks- 0.04
Fouls- 1.32

But what I think is more important is that in 53 games, he had more assists than he did in 2011 when he played 79 games. He also nearly matched his steals total in the shortened season (40 in 2011, 39 in 2012). He took more shots in his second season here than his first, so while he does pass up a lot of open shots, I think we'll see him be a little more aggressive here in a clearly defined role.

I'm not high on him by any means. If we could replace him with Barbosa I'd be ecstatic as I think he's likely to be our weak link on this team (maybe a step above Ebanks). But if he can average 5/4/1 with maybe half a steal or so and less than 2 turnovers, I think he'll be enough. We don't need the world from our bench, we just need them to be able to hold a lead for a bit and allow our starters to get enough rest to come back in and smash up the league.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39944
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby davriver290 on Fri Sep 07, 2012 11:01 am

We were missing scorers from the bench, this is why Blake seemed horrible. But we have Jamison, Meeks who are scorers. Blake is not as bad as people make him out to be. He played well in the playoffs and shot the three ball pretty well. Yeah sometimes yr turns down shots, but it's better than trying to be another Kobe when you're not (Shannon)
Sessions, Kobe, Metta, Gasol, Bynum
User avatar
davriver290

 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:14 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby Ariza3 on Fri Sep 07, 2012 3:23 pm

davriver290 wrote:We were missing scorers from the bench, this is why Blake seemed horrible. But we have Jamison, Meeks who are scorers. Blake is not as bad as people make him out to be. He played well in the playoffs and shot the three ball pretty well. Yeah sometimes yr turns down shots, but it's better than trying to be another Kobe when you're not (Shannon)


This. being able to just play PG and shoot the open 3 will be huge for Blake. being forced into a scoring option role for our bench as a SG was terrible for him bc thats not him. hes a good 3 point shooter and i think with meeks and jaminson surrounding him...maybe even ebanks; blake will be a decent backup PG for us. ill give him 1 last season before i really throw him out. everything is in blake's favor to have a good season; so hopefully he'll have one.
Image
User avatar
Ariza3

 
Posts: 4695
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:28 pm

Re: Steve Blake Discussion

Postby davriver290 on Fri Sep 07, 2012 3:44 pm

I think the first season he struggled horribly. But this season he seemed so much better. Sure he had some moments that just drove us crazy, but so did a whole host of other players as well. Steve Blake is not a scorer, he is not a penetrating PG. We brought him here for two reasons. Defense (which he does fairly well against PG's) and hit open threes. He accomplished this in the playoffs. Its not his fault Mike Brown placed him in SG roles. Thats just not him. Sure he gets payed a pretty penny, but he does exactly what he was brought in for. And he does it well.
Sessions, Kobe, Metta, Gasol, Bynum
User avatar
davriver290

 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:14 pm

PreviousNext

Return to NBA Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Lets Go Lakers, tigerjeterkobe and 20 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.