OrlandoTill wrote:I thought his potential to be high because I thought his athleticism would allow him to make Westbrook-like plays on both sides of the ball to make up the gap for Kyrie especially since I think he can shoot better than Westbrook. I think Kyrie has caught up due to understanding more how to use his ball handling ability to impact the other parts of his game and learning how to finish more(he to me was always a lights out shooter). I'm not sure if Kyrie has more BBall IQ than EB since I don't watch EB as much but I always thought he could surpass Irving if he learned how to harness his athletcism especially since Kyrie isn't stunning as a passer as well.
Do you think he will always need a playmaking guard around him or do you think he can grow in that area before his prime is over?
Irving is far from stunning as a passer, you are correct. Bledsoe's problem is that he is basically no better in that regard and he lacks Irving's shooting and scoring ability as well. I also feel—and this perspective is entirely subjective—that Irving is just more intelligent as an overall person, which may not translate into greater playmaking ability in his case yet may transfer to other areas of his game, as you have indicated. That is not to say that Bledsoe is dumb, just that he is not quite as perceptive or sensitive (in the intellectual sense of the term, not the emotional sense).
Bledsoe is sort of similar to Westbrook athletically, but Westbrook is two inches taller and basically in a league of his own in terms of thrust. He elevates more smoothly than Bledsoe on his shot, too. Westbrook is a worse three-point shooter, but that inefficiency stems more from Westbrook's poor shot selection. Without looking up shooting charts (which are not entirely reliable, anyway, since charters and broadcasters often read shooting distances incorrectly), Westbrook strikes me as a guy who is really good from 15-17 feet (basically the elbows-extended region), decent from 18-20 feet, and way too erratic outside of 20 feet. Unfortunately, he still shoots outside of 20 feet (especially from three) a lot, even though he can get wherever he wants on the floor. That is why Westbrook is more of a "superstar" than a "great player," if you catch my drift. The problem with Bledsoe is that he cannot be either, and he has not developed as a playmaker like Westbrook, either. Westbrook will never be a consummate playmaker, but he has significantly improved his basic functionality and assists-to-turnover ratio, which Bledsoe's progress has been much more marginal.
I believe that Bledsoe can grow a little—I actually believe that he improved his shooting, ball-handling, and passing skill heading into last season. But even with improved physical skill, his assists average, assists-to-turnover ratio, and basic level of effectiveness did not improve because he still lacked solid decision-making ability and a firm grasp on the subtleties of being a point guard. By the time that he is twenty-nine or thirty, he could be somewhat better in those areas while still retaining his basic explosiveness, but I believe that Bledsoe as a point guard will always be analogous to trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. The issue is not that he is not a point guard, but that he fails to foster the sort of consistent flow and rhythm that one really wants from a point guard. If Eric Bledsoe were a pitcher in baseball, he would be the kind of guy where the catcher or pitching coach is constantly coming to the mound to try and keep him in line in terms of pitch sequencing or mechanics—the kind of guy who possesses a 95-mph fastball and a respectable off-speed pitches yet little feel for how to combine and locate everything.
