Blake wasn't asked to be our scorer or creator either. He stepped up and took that role because we had no one else. Meeks didn't. Because he can't. He's solely a catch-and-shoot shooter ... who can't shoot. And come on, I think it's asking a lot to expect a D-leaguer thrust into the NBA playoffs against an elite team for his first NBA game to put up 30 or 40 points (although I do think he's capable of doing it.
I'd argue that Blake was the exact OPPOSITE. He's been asked to be that guy for at least one season before this (his first being in the triangle). We needed him to play better and to fill that role because frankly even if Nash had stayed healthy, we all knew Blake needed to be better. To his absolute credit he was better than we could have expected.
Like I said above: Meeks was brought here to spell Kobe and to space the floor. Did he do that? Eh. Maybe not, but his averages aren't far from where he was supposed to be. He didn't step up, that much is true. But he was thrust into a bigger role than what we were expecting of him and in that role he failed utterly. I wouldn't blame that totally on the kid. He thought he was going to play 15-20 minutes a game behind a Hall of Famer, not be responsible for lifting the offense almost every night.
I'm not asking Goudelock to do that, I'm just saying THAT would have meant to me that we have a keeper hands down. What I saw says we have a keeper, but he's still got to continue working and improving. That's all.
Helljumper wrote:Ok, maybe role wasn't the right word. Meeks doesn't know his limitations. Specifically what pisses me off so much about him is how he ALWAYS just puts his head down on the fast break and trys to attack the rim at full speed. He's not good at it. At all. He never looks to slow down to just run a play. He never looks for the pass. And it's cost us tons of possessions. Say what you want; maybe Meeks is just trying to expand his game or something, but IMO it boils down to terrible basketball IQ in that regard. I didn't see that from Glock.
I agree with what you said here. I'm not TRYING to defend Meeks
it's just sort of happening. I don't think he was great, I just think he's being crushed a little unfairly. He had/has plenty of faults. I just think that a guy with his experience can push someone like Goudelock who has less of it, but probably more overall talent.
Helljumper wrote:I'm a Glock fan. It still blows my mind that Brown didn't incorporate him into the rotation last year. When he did play rotation minutes, he was consistently effective. So I disagree that there's NO proof that he can do this on a more consistent basis.
You're right, there's just very, very little proof. (no pun intended)
Helljumper wrote:I agree with most of what you said though. I don't think anyone thinks Glock will be our savior or a "great" pick-up. I just don't get why you're so quick to dismiss Glock's performance and abilties as something that anyone at his price range can do ... yet you've also been vehemently defending the higher paid Meeks who has PROVEN that he doesn't have the ability to be a scorer/creator who can put up 20 points unless it's one of the few games a year where he catches fire from three.
Like I said, I'm not trying to defend Meeks. I'm just making sure he gets a fair shake here. Some people are making him into one of the worst role players we've ever had when the truth is somewhere in the middle. He had a tough season and like everyone else on the team was forced to do things that weren't in his wheelhouse.
I'm not trying to dismiss Goudelock either, I just think some people here value him too highly. It's kind of like Douglas-Roberts was early this season. I REALLY like both of those guys, but every NBA team had/has a chance at them and they're barely sticking. That's got to tell you something right? Maybe they're just not quite that good. I really like both of them though and I hope they stick around. Goudelock and Meeks and Douglas-Roberts make for great bench pieces on a team.