Martell Webster...so underappreciated

by jsmuc on Oct 23, 2008 10:01 AM PDT

I look at the battle for the starting SF spot and it looks to me like the blazers could use a playerlike Marty to start at SF. He really is the perfect fit for the blazers SF needs. All the players competing for that spot have some issues.

First, Rudy is a SG which doesn't help his chances plus he can't play a lick of defense( the only thing that will keep him from playing tons of minutes this year).

Outlaw doesn't seem to fit too well because he has to have the ball in his hands a lot and takes shots in bunches which is great on the second team, not so great in a lineup that featues Roy and Aldridge. Plus Outlaw's defense isn't exactly a strength.

Then we come to Batum, his defense is certainly better than either Rudy or Outlaw but he is a rookie, and I can't get too excited about him starting, although I think he probably will. Another thing about him is through the preseason games he has not proven that he can shoot the ball consistently which is something that the blazers could use from the SF spot, especially open threes.

I guess I say all that to say that we need to appreciate Marty. He is the perfect fit for our starting 3. He is a really good spot up three point shooter, and his defense is becoming a strength, and those are the two things that the blazers need from that SF position. Its just a shame he had to get hurt because I really think he was ready to be more consistant and have a breakout season. I hope he still does.

3 recs | Comment 37 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

He's the best fit that we have

But, he’s far from perfect. Who knows what he’ll look like this season, but last season, he didn’t show enough. A lot of indicators showed progress, but it’s work he needed.

Martell is really good, and he’s the best SF on the team. No other SF can match his shooting in particular. If his D improved in the off season, then we’re stoked when he comes back.

You’re right, though, that he’s a little under appreciated. But, you don’t get appreciated by dissappearing at times. You gots to be solid.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Oct 23, 2008 10:12 AM PDT 0 recs

go to utube

enter Webs name and watch his highlights, that is what we are missing. Martell was killing it in practice/training camp by taking it to the hoop strong. Hopefully he comes back healthy, (and maybe a little early) and continues his assult on the rim.

by usmcr3049 on Oct 23, 2008 10:20 AM PDT 0 recs

If Martell could step on D...

Martell was BECOMING a solid defensive player last year, but he’s still far, far, far from being a defensive stopper, which is what the Blazers really need at the three spot. If he can continue to improve his D, though, he could be perfect – especially if his consistency shooting the rock continues to improve at the same time.

I think Batum and Webster could make a nice one-two punch in a couple years – unfortunately, especially with Rudy and possibly B-Rex providing scoring punch for the second unit, I think Trout is ultimately the odd man out at SF.

Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.

by KP Corleone on Oct 23, 2008 10:39 AM PDT 0 recs

+1

The offense will come, and I’m not sure that with the addition of Oden, Martell is going to need to be as aggressive as he really should have been last year. Martell’s biggest gains need to be defensively, where he NEEDS to be a stopper if we are going to have a chance against the likes of the Lakers, or Charlotte.

by everett on Oct 23, 2008 11:04 AM PDT up 0 recs

Did I just say that?

Obviously, I meant New Orleans. I’m not sure the Bobcats pose quite as big a threat.

by everett on Oct 23, 2008 11:05 AM PDT up 0 recs

still better than anyone else we have there

by far.

Which makes me wonder what you’re looking for as a defensive stopper.

We haven't done anything yet... but don't blink.

by ratbastird on Oct 23, 2008 12:54 PM PDT up 0 recs

Not so sure about Trout

He brings a significantly different style and ability, and sometimes that kind of changeup off the bench can be very effective. I could see us potentially ending up with one of Martell/Batum starting and keeping Travis off the bench.

It all depends on how the second unit is going to be structured.

The most amazing thing about my amazing ego is I have amazingly little about which to be egotistical.
The pick and roll this year will emphasize "roll" followed by "dunk", followed by the wailings and lamentations of your women.

by jscot on Oct 24, 2008 4:17 AM PDT up 0 recs

Limited abilities

Assists, defense, passing (finding the open team-mate), moving-without-the-ball, driving to the basket, and blocks
are all skills that Martell is deficient in and are needed by a SF on the Blazers.

Why are posted getting excited about Batum?
He has them!

by spencerbutte on Oct 23, 2008 11:28 AM PDT 0 recs

correction

~~posted~~ Posters

by spencerbutte on Oct 23, 2008 11:30 AM PDT up 0 recs

And webster is still the better SF right now.

We haven't done anything yet... but don't blink.

by ratbastird on Oct 23, 2008 12:55 PM PDT up 0 recs

Really just the defense and moving without the ball are the only skills

that you listed that I’d say are needed by our starting SF. With Roy, LA, and Oden, our SF isn’t going to be handling the ball a bunch in a position to set up other guys. On the contrary, he’s mainly going to be in a position to finish openings created by those other guys, either by knocking down open 3s to spread the floor or flashing to the hoop when the opening is there.

Driving to the basket? No offense to Batum, but I’d hardly call that his strong suit and it certainly isn’t something I’d want him or Webster doing instead of Roy/Rudy/Bayless.

Blocks are far more of a result of helping off your defender. Very few guys that aren’t centers or PFs collect a lot of blocks on their own men in the NBA. I’d be much more concerned with his ability to keep SFs and SGs in front of him and contest their shots than necessarily getting the block. Watch Battier, he almost always moves his hand to block the shooter’s eyes, which leads to very few blocks, but can be more effective when contesting a shot.

I’d say by far the most important things we’re looking for in our SF is shooting and the ability to play on-ball defense. Webster is one of the best shooters in the league for his age and experience, and his man to man D has been improving and it certainly seems like he’s committing himself to it now, so I’m pretty happy keeping Webster as the starting SF once he gets back unless Batum absolutely explodes and is shooting like 40% from deep through December.

by Royster on Oct 23, 2008 1:38 PM PDT up 0 recs

Martell

I think the addition of Oden to the starting rotation will help Martell’s D. It will allow him to be more aggressive on the perimeter, and use his size and strength to to funnel guys right into Oden and Aldridge. I don’t think he is a Ron Artest in the making, but he will be a very serviceable wing for the future.
On offense, I have seen enough out of Martell to be content. He hits open threes, and doesn’t take that many touches to make an impact. Marty disappears a lot, but I think that has more to do with B Roy and LA getting the ball, more than it does Martell being lazy. With Martell in the line-up, it spreads the D out, and allows our stars to do their damage. With the other wing players, (Batum and Trout) teams can collapse to the middle a bit more, making it harder for our bigs and B-Roy.

by bad karma on Oct 23, 2008 11:37 AM PDT 0 recs

Still don't know

where the “Martell is a good defender” is coming from. He’s not. Never has been. May eventually become one one day but hasn’t yet. Another Martell myth is that he’s a good 3 pt shooter. Again, he may one day become one but isn’t yet. I wrote a post backed up with stats a while back about this. I love the guy, but his value to blazer fans is going to skyrocket just because he’s not around to critique. Everyone will assume that Martell would have done this or would have done that, but lets be honest, he’s wildly inconsistent and does absolutely nothing else besides shoot (look up his rebound and assist numbers) which statistically he isn’t that good at. Sorry I’m too lazy to link my post but just go to his ESPN player card if you don’t believe me. Defense is much harder to quantify however, so I’m fully expecting that as the season wears on, the “legend” of Martell will continue to grow…

Afew years ago, a broadcaster once said Pryzbilla's name is "Polish for 'personal foul.'" Ouch.

by chrischa on Oct 23, 2008 12:17 PM PDT 0 recs

Agreed, but...

I’m not sure anyone has tried to argue that he is a “good defender.”

by everett on Oct 23, 2008 12:26 PM PDT up 0 recs

he's decent

and the best we have at that position.

We haven't done anything yet... but don't blink.

by ratbastird on Oct 23, 2008 12:56 PM PDT up 0 recs

excatly

Buy this sig space!

by Zaron5551 on Oct 23, 2008 1:28 PM PDT up 0 recs

honestly, I think that remains to be seen.

it will be easy to say he’s the best (even though the coach has said time and time again that its more his style of play that has landed him the starting sport as opposed to his ability) because he’s not there making mistakes like Batum or Travis will (god, am I really arguing FOR batum? ugh).

Afew years ago, a broadcaster once said Pryzbilla's name is "Polish for 'personal foul.'" Ouch.

by chrischa on Oct 23, 2008 2:29 PM PDT up 0 recs

but he IS decent

tough to argue with that haha

Afew years ago, a broadcaster once said Pryzbilla's name is "Polish for 'personal foul.'" Ouch.

by chrischa on Oct 23, 2008 2:30 PM PDT up 0 recs

The myth of Martell as a bad 3 pt shooter?

I think anyone would agree that shooting is something that improves with age and NBA experience as players get used to the spotlight and the grind of the nba season. In the past 20 years, only 8 guys under 23 have have shot a better % from deep than Martell did last year off a similar volume of 3 pt attempts.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/tiny.cgi?id=TYeyP

All but two of the guys ahead of him were among the top twenty 3 pt shooters this year, and one of the guys who wasn’t was Ray Allen, and J.R. Smith shot over 40% as well. I’m not saying that he’s Jason Kapono right now, but he’s certainly in good company as a shooter just starting out in the league, so there’s not much more you could ask of a guy in Webster’s situation.

Heck, in the last twenty years, exactly two 18 year-olds have averaged better than 35% from deep over their first two seasons. One was Webster. Good luck guessing the other, but I have a feeling we’d be okay with Webster if his career turned out the same way, at least on the court.

by Royster on Oct 23, 2008 2:06 PM PDT up 0 recs

uh, that looks great when you compare him to shooters that fall in a certain age range...

but I’m not skewing my numbers like that. I just look at straight 3 point shooting. Don’t matter how old you are. I mean, if the blazers ever play a team of 23 year olds and under, or if there is some kind of extracurricular shooting competition between 18 year olds, I suppose we should use your statistics…

Afew years ago, a broadcaster once said Pryzbilla's name is "Polish for 'personal foul.'" Ouch.

by chrischa on Oct 23, 2008 2:27 PM PDT up 0 recs

My point being that no one at Webster's age

is a good three point shooter, but given that almost everyone who has shot as well as him when at that age is now an elite 3 point shooter in the league, there’s an absolute historical precedent that he’ll be considered an elite 3 point shooter either this year or the next.

I’m more of the belief that we should make our decisions on Webster based on what he’ll be doing in the future, since that’s more important than what is in the past. All the previous stats are good for is predicting future production. I couldn’t care less if he shot 70% last year if I knew he was going to shoot 30% this year, but since we don’t have a crystal ball, we don’t know for sure what he will shoot, but all indications are that he’ll be a great shooter now that he’s had a couple years to get used to the grind.

The bottom line is that Webster has shot better than pretty much anyone else his age has for the last 20 years, and looking at the other guys on the list, that would seem to be a strong predictor for future success.

And shooting a full % point worse than Ray Allen and better than Korver/Bibby/Johnson last year is pretty indicative of him as an awful shooter, too, but those guys are all terrible shooters. Or that his career % is just about .7% worse than Dirk’s, and is better than Michael Finley’s and Mike Bibby’s.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/fg3_pct_active.html

That would indicate that, statistically, yes, he is pretty good at it, if you actually look at the numbers instead of just complain about how inconsistent he is.

by Royster on Oct 23, 2008 3:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

really? you want to play this game?

Martell is the 44th best 3 point shooter according to ESPN. my turn to drop names. here are some players who shot the 3 ball better than Martell last year: Kareem Rush, Troy Murphy, Roger Mason, Rashad Mccants. Real world beaters. STEVE BLAKE (ranked 21st in the league) IS A BETTER 3 POINT SHOOTER THAN MARTELL WEBSTER. and don’t try to say that its because he doesn’t shoot that much cause Martell only shot about 20 more. Martell Webster is not a great 3 point shooter right now. Plain and simple. I never said that he won’t turn out to be good and I did say that I like the guy but don’t try to mess with statistics on this. Neither one of us has a crystal ball as you put it and both of us WANT him to become great. (you’re a blazer fan right?) Lets just agree that Martell has yet to become a great shooter but has the potential to one day.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?stat=nba3ptpct&season=2008&seasontype=2

Afew years ago, a broadcaster once said Pryzbilla's name is "Polish for 'personal foul.'" Ouch.

by chrischa on Oct 23, 2008 4:44 PM PDT up 0 recs

rush is 27ish, so is mason, mccants,blake too. :)

The faith (and I'm a guy) perverts. :)

by faith on Oct 23, 2008 5:07 PM PDT up 0 recs

Just because those guys aren't household names doesn't mean they're not

good 3 point shooters. The fact is, the only stats that make guys household names are points, rebounds, and assists. All of those guys are higher than Billups, and Ray Allen also, does that make them bad 3 point shooters?

Heck, Anthony Parker was 7th in the league. Just because his sister is way more famous as a basketball player doesn’t mean he isn’t a good three point shooter.

And yes, he’s not a GREAT 3 point shooter yet, but I quote you from above:

he’s wildly inconsistent and does absolutely nothing else besides shoot (look up his rebound and assist numbers) which statistically he isn’t that good at

Since he was on par with Ray Allen, Barbosa and DWill this past year, I’d say that makes him a pretty decent shooter at the very least. Besides, the differences between a lot of these guys is neglible. As in, if Martell makes 6 more 3 pointers over the course of the year, suddenly he’s above that magic 40% threshold and no one’s complaining.

by Royster on Oct 23, 2008 9:28 PM PDT up 0 recs

Hmm.

I’ll agree that Martell has yet to become a great shooter but has the potential to become one.

But you said it is a myth that he is a good 3 point shooter. Great, no, but good, yes. Over 38.8% on volume 3s is good, it gives an effective 58. If we score an effective 58 FGA overall, we’ll do just fine.

He’s not great, but he is already good, and has the potential to become great. As you said, he was 44th in the league last year. If we talk about volume shooters and drop out everyone who had 100 attempts fewer than he had, then he’s up to 34th. That’s good. Not great, but good.

Since young guys tend to improve at this skill, it isn’t at all unreasonable to expect him to bump up another 1-2% this year. We’re not talking crazy stuff to expect that kind of improvement. If he improves 2%, he’s in the top 20.

Why is it a big deal that Steve Blake shot better than Martell last year? Steve Blake shot very well. I don’t get your point. Both of these guys last year brought exactly what we want out of their positions this year on offense — a decent threat from deep to spread the court.

Great? That would be a bonus. So would the ability to take it to the hole on occasion. But out of those two positions, I’ll settle happily for good 3 pt shooting, as far as what we need on offense.

What I would like to see out of Martell is a little more consistency (and more open looks as well) nudging his percentages up 3-4. But we can do quite nicely with 40 from deep, if that’s all we get.

by jscot on Oct 24, 2008 4:36 AM PDT up 0 recs

It does matter.

If it didn’t, the league would be dominated by 18 yrear olds.

It is pretty well established that there are learning curves in most professions, with professional athletics being high on the list. One reason for that is physical development. Most 25 – 30 year old athletes are more developed physically. Then there is the edge experience provides. Do you honestly think there are not little tricks and moves available to players that help them get a better shot attempt? Learning them comes with experience.

When a player performs at a level above that of his age group, there is reason to believe he will continue to improve as he matures and gains experience.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Oct 23, 2008 5:02 PM PDT up 0 recs

uh, again, it doesn't matter when we're arguing about right NOW.

if you missed it, we both actually agree that Martell has the potential to BECOME a good shooter (like many young talented players). My original point is that he is currently not a great 3 point (specifically) shooter. that has nothing to do with development, age curves, anything else. I’ll say this again to end this ridiculous side conversation: right now, Martell is overrated as a shooter (by blazer fans, surely not by basketball fans) but has the potential to one day become one. hopefully.

Afew years ago, a broadcaster once said Pryzbilla's name is "Polish for 'personal foul.'" Ouch.

by chrischa on Oct 23, 2008 6:05 PM PDT up 0 recs

Except that Martell IS a good 3PT shooter right now.

As jscot points out above, his percentage last season was in the top 50 in the league, which certainly translates into above average. He was not too far off from guys like Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. Almost 39% usually translates as good. Royster’s point is valid as well. Webster was not only a good long distance shooter last season, he was very good within his age group. Therefore we have a guy who is already a good shooter, with the potential to become very good. In my book, that’s something to get excited about.

I don’t think Blazer fans overate Martell. If anything, jsmuc’s original point is valid. He’s under appreciated and get’s left out when we talk about our “big three”. In my opinion, Martell Webster has as much chance of becoming one of the very best at his position in the league as does Roy, Aldridge or Oden.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Oct 24, 2008 6:50 AM PDT up 0 recs

One of the most lucid observations I've seen in a long time here

I love the guy, but his value to blazer fans is going to skyrocket just because he’s not around to critique.

by tweener on Oct 23, 2008 10:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

Depends

If the guys we have play well, his value to Blazer fans will plummet.

by jscot on Oct 24, 2008 4:37 AM PDT up 0 recs

I think that there is alot of pent up frustration about how and when he was drafted.

I don’t think that his progress indicates anything to the “limited abilities” arguement, he was pre-maturely tagged with a spot up shooter title before he even steped onto a nba court, (kinda reminds me of this center we got who’s suppose to change the game of basketball), He does move well without the ball when he’s told to, he also stands in the corner very well when he’s told to.

Every game I watch that has martell playing in, he’s always the guy drawing either the 1st opposing teams scoring option, or the second,….

I’m not sure how that works out if blake and roy also are on the floor, but it seems to me that martell holds his own against the elite of the league, he may not be lock down but rarely do the powers that be go off on martell. (think what martin did to batum) that rarely happens to martell.

I think that alot of people are still just upset about the whole chris paul thing, and take it out on martell, the whole while they forget that he came out of highschool, and is VERY young..yet, very mature in the brains department.

I love me my martell.

if your guarding the best in the league and you don’t have 40 points scored on you, you can call yourself a good defender.

hate away hate filled persons.

I’ll love him for ya!! :)

The faith (and I'm a guy) perverts. :)

by faith on Oct 23, 2008 12:51 PM PDT 0 recs

I agree with you 100%

I think the expectations that he’d blow up and we took him over chris paul are really what weighs against him. Expectations have been high. Fact of the matter is he’s actually pretty decent. He’s the best SF we have, he’s still learning and getting better every year.

4 years were how long the blazers organization said it would take (I believe nate stated this specifically from personal experience with another SF that blew up his 4th year). He’s in his fourth year, and I have faith that Webster will be awesome this year.

Additionally, we don’t need all-stars at every freaking position.

We haven't done anything yet... but don't blink.

by ratbastird on Oct 23, 2008 12:59 PM PDT up 0 recs

S-bo

Well be an all-star starter coming out of our 15th roster spot. Book it.

by jscot on Oct 24, 2008 4:39 AM PDT up 0 recs

Martin didn't quite score 40 on Batum did he?

we got ourselves a great defender afterall!

Afew years ago, a broadcaster once said Pryzbilla's name is "Polish for 'personal foul.'" Ouch.

by chrischa on Oct 23, 2008 2:33 PM PDT up 0 recs

ha!! and batum wasn’t guarding the “best in the league”, but martin did score 3 quicker than greased lightning fouls on him, when did he get yanked oh yeah, 3 min into the first quarter. (layin on that sarcasm pretty thick here)
What I ment by that comment was that martell is very rarely pulled for having 3 quick fouls in the first quarter. A trait that indicates to me, that he know’s how NOT to foul the man he’s guarding. There are reasons he starts for this club, and they have nothing to do with his stat line, and everything to do with what martell know’s to do…exactly what he’s told to do. Do you really think nate would continue to start martell if nate didn’t want him camped out at the three point line for the majority of last season? that’s exactly what nate wanted. so that is exactly what martell did.
a 20 year old professional basketball player in his third/fourth year is suppose to be greater than jordan? I think not, but Martell is doing very well for where he’s at in his career.

heavin forbid we hold the rest of our rookies to the same bar we’re holding webster too, had that been travis could have been abducted and shipped to ireland by now, bayless who would be blasted tarred and feathered by now for not knowing how to pass the ball, maybe even had a ball glued to his foot for trying to pass off of it. shoot even roy would take some flack for not blowing his rookie season stats out of the water his second year. Lamarcus…yeah, we’d have traded him back to Chicago for not having enough attitude and being way to nice oh, and being soft…

Let paul go man…just let him go….

Martell does not turn the ball over excessively, he does not foul excessively, he does hit threes at an above average percentage, he does guard starters in the talentedest league in the world, and best of all…he does it in stride…quick could ask martell about starting any day and martell would say something to the effect of “yup, that’s what I’m gonna do” opposed to Mr 4th quarters response to the media when asked about starting in the pre season….“eh,…yeah, Man, don’t wanna answer that one….” (or what ever it was that he said)….Martell belongs on this teams starting team.

The faith (and I'm a guy) perverts. :)

by faith on Oct 23, 2008 5:05 PM PDT up 0 recs

athlete's foot

I think he will fit his role perfectly when he returns. It is ashame about his foot injury. We are basing everything on what he has previously done. It was no secret that he came in to camp in the best shape of his life, working on all of his faults. Who knows if he is improved or not. Look at what Sergio did over the Summer.

by clonigro on Oct 23, 2008 1:03 PM PDT 0 recs

Martell is awesome

He’s a great shooter for Oden and LMA to kick out to we all know that. But I think he’s really developing his game above the rim. Did you see how many dunks he had in the first Kings game? This shows that he’s starting to feel more comfortable attacking the other bigs around the rim with his speed and jumping ability. It’s great having him as a shooter but his ability to score point blank may separate him from players like Kopono and Korver. Not to mention Martell’s developing defense.

by BrokeButStoked on Oct 23, 2008 1:40 PM PDT 0 recs