SF Future, in portland?

by blackandwite323 on May 4, 2008 9:32 PM PDT

As I see it portland has four avenues on which to pursue a SF, Martell, Travis, JJ, or Bring someone in

1. Martell Webster

Drafted for his smooth jump shot, Martell is still developing in the NBA, he is younger than Travis and has better mechanics on his jumper, their defense is about equal but Nate has said that he is looking for Martell to become a lock down defender. In my opinion he is the second best dunker on the team behind Travis and works better as a part of the offense, as he develops his dribbling and spot up ability he could have a triple- threat potential.

2. Travis Outlaw

Travis Outlaw is an athletic freak, this creates mismatch problems for the other team, he also has a solid jumper that he can get off no matter what. He also provides the fans with some monster dunks. He has developed a reputation as a clutch player. But, he doesn't play great defense (I see him having the potential to block a lot more shots than he does with his amazing leaping ability), and he also has a tendency to take a lot of wild shots, it works great when hes on but he is very inconsistent.

3. James Jones

James Jones is a good shooter from beyond the three point line but is an average defender and has already hit his ceiling as a player, he struggled at times through the season and doesn't have much potential, he seems to be a good character guy and may be a back up/ roll player if Travis or Martell get traded.

4. Elsewhere

Some players that have been recently discussed are Josh Childress of the Hawks and Josh Howard of the Mavericks

a. Josh Childress

His stats look about the same as Webster's in more minutes, both teams have a strong PF and SG (Joe Johnson, Al Horford) although he is better defensively, unless he is available for a straight up trade for Outlaw /Webster or even jack we shouldn't trade for him

b. Josh Howard

He is a worse three point shooter than either Travis or Martell, although he has higher scoring averages, he also plays more than either of them and is a key part of the Dallas offense. He fairly good defensively but his character issues, or at least speculation of issues almost negate the advantages he would have over the combination of Outlaw/Webster.

Conclusion

Personally I think Webster has the potential to be the best of any of these players and is already a solid contributer, as he develops he will fit in better with the team and will improve statistically, between he and outlaw I think small forward is not a weakness for this team although many seem to think so. Pursuing Howard or Childress seems like a fruitless effort in my opinion because what we would have to give up would not warrant the slight improvements unless we get rid of players KP thinks don't fit well and make a steal of a trade.

2 recs | Comment 81 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

webster & childress

the two averaged a similar amount of PPG in comparable minutes (childress had slightly more minutes). but childress also had a much higher FG% (57% to 42%) and the two acquire their points in different ways. Webster is more of a jump shooter, so his FG% will be lower. Childress is more of a slasher and rebounder, so his shots are in close. The long range shot is in his arsenal (he shot 36% from 3pt territory in 80 attempts), but it’s not really his game. More importantly though, Childress is a superior defender, which is what the Blazers need. Putting him out on the floor, he instantly becomes the Blazers’ best perimeter defender. While it’s true that Webster has the potential to be the better scorer of the two, IMHO, Childress’ defensive prowess is more important, because the Blazers already have scorers on the team (Roy, Aldridge, Outlaw, Oden, Rudy), but have precious few quality perimeter defenders. I would therefore take Childress over Webster (though in the right system, Webster would be a fine player)

by dp8039 on May 4, 2008 9:55 PM PDT 0 recs

You said it way better than I did.

Good job.

If somebody hits you with an object you should beat the hell out of them.-Charles Barkley

by Winchester on May 4, 2008 11:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

Consistency is key.

Here’s Webster’s points game log for March (last full month of the season): 2, 0, 17, 15, 7, 13, 10, 5, 5, 16, 8, 22, 23, 14, 3.

Here’s Danny Granger’s log: 27, 17, 22, 19, 23, 11, 24, 26, 0, 32, 18, 26, 19, 26, 23.

Don’t look at the totals—just look at the consistency. Martell averaged 10.7 for the month, but you never knew if you were going to get half that or double that. Granger averaged 22.4 for the month, and every night you could pretty much count on close to 20.

I don’t think it matters so much what types of skills our SF brings to the position (shooter vs. slasher vs. rebounder), as long as we can count on his consistent use of those skills night in and night out. Right now, Martell is crappy for two nights and awesome for one. We need him to be decent every night, and we’ll become a much better team.

by bfan on May 4, 2008 10:22 PM PDT 0 recs

Webster needs to have his shot set up. He has very little ability to create his own shot.

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 1:15 AM PDT up 0 recs

On this team, that's not a weakness.

Heck, it may even be a STRENGHTH:
He’s willing and able to be a weapon in Nate and Roy’s hands, to to speak.
I’ve noticed that guards who CAN create for themselves frequently CAN’T be set up
by teammates, or even coaches. (Kidd and Avery, anyone?)

Martell plays solid away-from-the-ball team offense, a very underrated concept.
You hear about “team defense” a lot (which is also a realm where MarWeb beats Trout hands down),
but just consider “team offense”, and think abut what that means.
Then ask yourself if Martell plays that, and if necessarily most starting backcourt players play it.

Kobe’s just picked it up this year, really.
Agent Zero is a classic example of someone who has NO “team offense” skills.
And at least three cheers for the memory of Darius Miles when he was healthy.

“Team offense” is harder to come by than you’d think.
And Martell has it.

Blazers have a five-on-three...and they pull it back and wait for help.

by QualityPie on May 5, 2008 3:10 PM PDT up 0 recs

Team Offense

The best stat for Team Offense is assists. You will notice how Kobe’s number of assists have gone up.
Look at the assists for players that are not PGs. You will notice the big increase this year in assists for Paul Pierce, Vince Carter, Hedo Turkoglu, and Richard Hamilton. You may have also noticed that those players help lift their teams into the playoffs. Assists are team-ball.

Now your statements relating Martell to Team Offense well I didn’t see it in the games I watched. When I look for an indication of it in his assists numbers, well…

1.6 just doesn’t say Team Offense.

by spencerbutte on May 6, 2008 11:16 AM PDT up 0 recs

He's 21.

All those other guys have been around. And when I say around, I mean AROUND. Let’s just give the kids some time.

I do agree that assists are a good indicator. But you also have to look at the role. For our team, Roy’s job was to break down the defense and hit the open shooter. Martell’s job was to take the shot. I don’t think the low assist numbers say “bad team offense” as much as they say “designated shooter.”

by bfan on May 6, 2008 2:33 PM PDT up 0 recs

"designated shooter."

No team wants their "designated shooter." to be shooting 42%. Particularly when Oden plays this year. Oden should shoot at or slightly over 50%. Roy can’t be the lone player feeding the bigs. Any player shooting 42% should should be feeding the guy that makes that high percentage shot.

FG% 3p% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG
0.422 0.388 0.735 0.7 3.2 3.9 1.2
On second check, I was being to generous with 1.6.

by spencerbutte on May 6, 2008 5:41 PM PDT up 0 recs

they do if it's from

3 point line.

But you have a point. Don’t worry. I’ve hired people to slap Martel around until he can make that basket to save his life…

Here's to being hated. Come on #1 pick!

by ratbastird on May 8, 2008 12:24 PM PDT up 0 recs

OK.

People keep bringing up that Nate said that Wester could become a lock down defender.

Nate also said:

1. Luke Ridnour could become as good as Steve Nash.
2. Aldridge could become the next Kevin Garnett.
3. Travis Outlaw’s could become a Kobe type offensive threat.

I love the Blazers, but I’m not delusional. Webster might become a lock down defender and Luke Ridnour might become the next Steve Nash, but I still need to see it before I can believe it.

If somebody hits you with an object you should beat the hell out of them.-Charles Barkley

by Winchester on May 4, 2008 11:28 PM PDT 0 recs

Don't forget,

Taurean Green was going to win us a few games this last season too.

One of Two Official Blazer's Edge Poets Laureate for the 2008-2009 Season

"Scholars have long known that fishing eventually turns men into philosophers. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to buy decent tackle on a philosopher's salary." - Patrick McManus

by T Darkstar on May 5, 2008 6:34 AM PDT up 0 recs

This remiends me something I read in Spain

about Sam Mitchel. The story: Sam was explaining his players (Raptors) the systems to defend against Bynum when after some minutes Bosh says: That´s OK, coach, but Bynum is injured and he won´t play this game.

For meat´s wolf, teeth of dog.

by amlmart1 on May 5, 2008 6:57 AM PDT up 0 recs

"reminds"

For meat´s wolf, teeth of dog.

by amlmart1 on May 5, 2008 6:57 AM PDT up 0 recs

That was a Peter Vecsey special.

Totally made up, and Vecsey retracted the story later.

by howlingfantods on May 5, 2008 10:00 AM PDT up 0 recs

I think Outlaw could become a Kobe type offensice threat

If all I'm remembered for is being a good basketball player, then I've done a bad job with the rest of my life. - Isiah Thomas

by JTDuck22 on May 5, 2008 8:37 AM PDT up 0 recs

Martell "a lock down defender"????

“Nate has said that he is looking for Martell to become a lock down defender.”
Has Martell shown ANY signs of becoming a lock down defender?

This is what Dave had to say….(Player-by-Player: Martell Webster)
“Defending:—He’s not a marquee defender. He’s not even a sign-on-the-telephone-pole defender yet. But his defense is improving. If you remember the litany of unopposed, step-behind drives he used to give up you will have noticed their relative absence this year. Even though he still had trouble staying in front of people he at least stayed with his man long enough to channel them into help. Being guarded by him wasn’t a complete vacation.”

We need a SF that can DEFEND.

There is a player in the draft that become that LOCK DOWN defender.
He has the following Strengths:
• Unselfishness
• Perimeter defense
• Stat-stuffing role-player potential
• Size for wing player
• Ability to create separation from
defender
• Finishing ability
• Court vision
• Freakish athleticism
• Outstanding wingspan
• Mid-range game
• Transition play
• Cuts to the basket
• Basketball IQ
• Terrific experience
• Upside

That player is Nicolas Batum.

“The guy can be simply unstoppable, able to create his own shot at will, to easily set up his teammates for easy baskets, to play lock down defense taking advantage of his freakish wingspan and athleticism, and come up with a slew of highlights in the form of blocks, dunks, long-range off-the-dribble shots, etc.”
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Nicolas-Batum-537/

Batum is 19 years old and has the following problems you would expect at that age:
• Confidence/intensity wavers
• Willingness to dominate opponents
• Gets extremely passive at times
• Not a go-to scorer
• Poor rebounder (with our back court players – no issue)
• Still a work in progress

But….. he has “the package”.

by spencerbutte on May 4, 2008 11:33 PM PDT 0 recs

Blazers have scorers

dp8039 said in another post…
the Blazers already have scorers on the team (Roy, Aldridge, Outlaw, Oden, Rudy), but have precious few quality perimeter defenders.

We need an unselfish, stat-stuffing role-player that plays good perimeter defense at SF.

Blazers need to draft Nicolas Batum.

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 12:38 AM PDT up 0 recs

I don't understand

Here is a player whose weaknesses are: “Ball-handling skills improvable, streaky perimeter shot, lacks aggressiveness offensively, confidence/intensity wavers, willingness to dominate opponents, gets extremely passive at times, still a work in progress”...isn’t that, uh, Martell Webster? I don’t know why we would trade Webster just to acquire Webster—a Webster who is two years younger, two years more immature and less confident, and with three years less experience in the NBA.

by abdelnaby on May 5, 2008 10:48 AM PDT up 0 recs

Draft not trade!

Draft Batum who has defensive skills. Batum has the capability – Webster isn’t demonstrated that he does.

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 11:03 AM PDT up 0 recs

in a post below

you asked “Would you miss Webster?” so I assumed he was on the outs in some way. Sorry if I misunderstood.

Anyway, my counterpoint would be: Batum hasn’t really demonstrated he has the capability to be a lockdown defender in the NBA either. Defense is, I think, what really sets the NBA apart from the Euroleagues; it is (ahem) a whole different ballgame. Webster’s shown enough potential in this department to garner support from his defense-minded coach (who is also the defense-minded coach for our international team and scouts, matches up, and competes against the European guys every summer). To me, you’re replacing a guy with proven potential and ability to improve with a guy who is a complete question mark. The team’s development curve is beyond the need to make gambles like that.

That being said, I’ve been intrigued by Batum for a while and wouldn’t mind adding him to our growing stable of developing European players—but is he NBA-ready now? Is he a Webster replacement as of now? Definitely not.

by abdelnaby on May 5, 2008 11:16 AM PDT up 0 recs

“Batum hasn’t really demonstrated he has the capability to be a lockdown defender in the NBA either.”

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 12:05 PM PDT up 0 recs

By the time YOU realize that Webster can’t blunt the scoring of players like LeBron James – CLE ….Carmelo Anthony – DEN….Richard Jefferson – NJ…Jason Richardson – CHA….Antawn Jamison – WA….Rudy Gay – MEM ….Michael Redd – MIL…Andre Iguodala – PHI ….Kevin Durant – SEA...Hedo Turkoglu – ORL….Paul Pierce – BOS.

and Batum can…..a couple of years will pass and Batum will be an unobtainable fixure on another team.

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 12:12 PM PDT up 0 recs

he can?

I went on Youtube looking for some highlights of Batum shutting down Carmelo or Lebron, but it’s weird, I couldn’t find any.

by abdelnaby on May 5, 2008 1:00 PM PDT up 0 recs

Youtube....

We now know the primary source you use to evaluate players.

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 3:28 PM PDT up 0 recs

It's better than my sources.

I used trained falcons. I sent them to the games. That part went okay. They came back. That part also went okay. But I could understand a word they told me after they got back. I was sorely disappointed.

I’m holding out hope for the otters though.

One of Two Official Blazer's Edge Poets Laureate for the 2008-2009 Season

"Scholars have long known that fishing eventually turns men into philosophers. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to buy decent tackle on a philosopher's salary." - Patrick McManus

by T Darkstar on May 5, 2008 4:23 PM PDT up 0 recs

well

I also tried looking for tickets to a game featuring Batum defending against NBA-level players so I could see it firsthand, but darned if I could find any of those either.

by abdelnaby on May 5, 2008 4:32 PM PDT up 0 recs

i used my crayons and drew pictures

mostly of my certifications.

They’re lovely.

Here's to being hated. Come on #1 pick!

by ratbastird on May 8, 2008 12:26 PM PDT up 0 recs

"By the time YOU realize that Webster can't blunt the scoring...and Batum can"

Link please. Saying that Batum can blunt LBJ doesn’t make it so.

by BlazersOrBust on May 6, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up 0 recs

It does if you wish hard enough

and have fairy dust.

Here's to being hated. Come on #1 pick!

by ratbastird on May 8, 2008 12:26 PM PDT up 0 recs

Am I the only one

Who thinks there is value in a group of guys playing together and maturing together as a team?

"Show some respect to this living legend, this hall of famer...Arvydas Sabonis." - Bill Walton

by tominhawaii on May 5, 2008 2:24 AM PDT 0 recs

No.

"We comin along." Travis Outlaw

by annthefan on May 5, 2008 2:27 AM PDT up 0 recs

No

For meat´s wolf, teeth of dog.

by amlmart1 on May 5, 2008 5:23 AM PDT up 0 recs

Would you really miss Webster?

Miss him standing in corner waiting for the setup for a 3 pointer?
Or to be finally abandoned by his defender in search of a player that moves?

Would you miss his 1.2 assists per 28 minutes (each game) last year?

Do you really think he makes the other players (on our team) around him better?

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 7:17 AM PDT up 0 recs

Blame Nate for Webster standing in the corner...

For the last two years our small forward has been religiously stashed in the corner to spread the defense. This year it was Webster as a starter and Jones as a backup, last year it was Ime as a starter and Webster as a backup. Ime averaged 1.5 assists per 28 minutes in 06-07 playing under Nates system, and most people were happy with the season he had. Our small forward doesnt need to be a playmaker, thats Roy, Aldridge, and Oden’s job. Good 3 point shooting and good defense at the 3 will suffice(think James Jones). Wester has the potential to give us that and more next year IMO…

RUDY > MJ

by myemic23 on May 5, 2008 1:46 PM PDT up 0 recs

Yep

That’s all on Nate. I’ve noticed that as well.

KP: You know Mike Rice, Mike Barret you've both been very valuable to us this season. But I'd still trade you both for a couple of 2nd round draft picks.

by Dheepan on May 5, 2008 1:47 PM PDT up 0 recs

Maybe it's the only role Webster does will

There were many opportunities for Webster to move without the ball or create space.
In most of the games I watched, he was unable to create distance from a defender.
He took himself out of play.

I think Nate was only maximizing Webster’s current lever of capability.

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 4:24 PM PDT up 0 recs

no... but...

I think you need the right group of players and I think we need a larger skill set difference from starters to bench so that the roles are clearly defined.

We have a player or two that will be coming over and we need room.

We have guys who we really won’t be playing and their trade value is decent at the moment.

I want to chop down the roster and make room for those who will really be playing and while doing that pick up that one last key piece so that all other changes are small tweaks and we CAN grow together as the team we will be.

That’s where I’m coming from.

Here's to being hated. Come on #1 pick!

by ratbastird on May 5, 2008 9:06 AM PDT up 0 recs

You're not the only one

but I still think that is probably not correct. Look at the last 30 years of NBA history and name me one championship team that started five home grown players.

We’re the fanbase, and fans notoriously fall too deeply in love with their team. I saw a thread in RealGM where someone floated a Dirk for LMA proposal and all the blazer fans were outraged by the idea. In that same thread, someone asked about LBJ for Roy, and a plurality of posters there said no. Good lord. I mean, I’m not a huge fan of Dirk and I don’t think he makes sense for us and I think LBJ is very slightly, marginally, less good than he gets credit for, but talk about overrating your talent.

by howlingfantods on May 5, 2008 10:16 AM PDT up 0 recs

No.

Perfect practice makes perfect.

by Ojala John on May 5, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up 0 recs

No

by fatwansaboni on May 5, 2008 10:37 AM PDT up 0 recs

Nyet.

Though I would be happy if we could add a top-tier player like Danny Granger.

by bfan on May 5, 2008 10:56 AM PDT up 0 recs

no

Sometimes I feel like I'm going in different directions...

by porterfan30 on May 5, 2008 11:00 AM PDT up 0 recs

Apparently the answer is not yes.

You are not the only one. You are not the loneliest number. We may not be there, but you have us all in your heart. Awww. :)

One of Two Official Blazer's Edge Poets Laureate for the 2008-2009 Season

"Scholars have long known that fishing eventually turns men into philosophers. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to buy decent tackle on a philosopher's salary." - Patrick McManus

by T Darkstar on May 5, 2008 4:30 PM PDT up 0 recs

No too but

We are already making major changes by bringing in Oden and Fernandez. Between them that’s 50 or so minutes per game added to the rotation. As minutes are a zero sum game, current players will be losing 50 minutes per game. Where is this going to come from? Also there is currently a 9 man rotation; if everything stays the same and you add two players you’ve got an unwieldy 11 man rotation. If everything stays the same there are going to be players used to minutes who will be sitting on the bench waiting for someone to be ineffective or injured. On top of that we would still have one of the least productive PG units in the NBA. I don’t want major changes either because what we have now is fun to watch and can develop into something better but the above facts make it clear that something is going to happen.

by underhill on May 5, 2008 5:10 AM PDT 0 recs

That

was supposed to be a response to tom and ann

by underhill on May 5, 2008 5:13 AM PDT up 0 recs

minutes

If the team got rid of Webster, there’s an additional 28 minutes gained right there. Then, if either Blake or Jack is shipped out, theres another 28. And maybe Roy doesn’t need to play 38 minutes a game, maybe 33 will do. So that’s about 60 minutes available on the perimeter (assuming no one on roster has a substantial play increase – Sorry, Sergio). If the team adds Childress, or another similar player, we could say that he would effectively take Martell’s minutes straight up. Now, we’re down to 33. If the team drafts a point guard, especially a raw one like Westbrook, the team could get away with playing him 10-15 minutes a game. Now down to 18-23 minutes, which will go to Rudy. It’s tight. But, if the team gets Westbrook or another draftee at the point, Sergio too could become expendable (without getting into the whole Rudy loves Sergio thing), and so Sergio’s meager minutes could also be in play

I’m not opposed to letting a young team develop together, but they have to be the right players. You can’t just slop down a bunch of kids and expect them to become juggernauts. There has to be a plan and roles and organization and awareness of needs. For instance, right now the team needs perimeter defenders. While having a bunch of guys who are friends on a team is nice, if none of those guys are going to become perimeter defenders, one needs to be brought in somehow.

Underhill mentioned that he does not want major changes, but also mentions the lack of productivity from the point. Blake is in his prime, Jack seems to be treading water, and Sergio looks like he may never develop into an NBA-calibre starting point guard. Again, just like the perimeter defenders thing, this increase in production that we as fans want has to come from somewhere. If the players currently on roster do not have the talent to effectively run the point on offense and guard opponent’s point guards on defense, where is the increase going to come from? Now, if you think that someone on the Blazers has that ability, that’s a different question altogether, but in my opinion, no Blazer PG has the skill package the team needs

by dp8039 on May 5, 2008 6:22 AM PDT up 0 recs

yeah... what he said.

Here's to being hated. Come on #1 pick!

by ratbastird on May 5, 2008 9:07 AM PDT up 0 recs

If you think of B-Roy as a point

Then the point guard position is one of our most productive positions. If a Roy-Rudy back court is as effective as I’m beginning to think it will be, then we will have excellent starters at every position besides SF. Our current SFs have potential, but we have too many players too keep all of them and the easiest position to upgrade will probably be SF.

I like the idea of keeping a team together for a long time, but using the cake analogy we are still gathering the ingredients. If we can consolidate some of our talent by trading for a young, starting quality SF, then we will have a pretty good set of ingredients and can start thinking about putting the cake in the oven.

by trk on May 5, 2008 11:44 AM PDT up 0 recs

roy and rudy

on offense, that would be a potent backcourt, but one of rudy’s weaknesses is defense. not only would the team start a defensive liability in rudy, but roy or rudy may not be able to keep up with the quicker point guards in the league. i could see Chris Paul or Tony Parker eating that backcourt alive.

by dp8039 on May 5, 2008 2:30 PM PDT up 0 recs

Rudy's defense isn't that bad

And Rudy will probably be the quickest player on this team. Chris Paul or Tony Parker won’t have nearly as easy a time scoring on Rudy as Rudy would have scoring on them.

Rudy’s coach talking about Rudy’s defense:

“Our second step forward was when Rudy, who had to make an effort just to play today, started to do some things on defense, like the good defender he is, because after that everything started working for us,” Joventut head coach Aito Garcia Reneses said afterward. “Earlier in the day, when we thought Rudy couldn’t play, it was a little bit of a jolt for everyone, but without him, we knew we could still play well. We were prepared for the possibility, because he’s been hurting for about three weeks. But when he came out and started defending well, like he can, everyone started to do the same. We went up from that point and dominated the rest of the game.”

http://www.euroleague.net/ulebcup/home/news/i/30449/448/item

His whole attitude really impresses me as well. Thats the type of team-first mentality that all Blazers should have.

by trk on May 5, 2008 3:38 PM PDT up 0 recs

Do you think

Rudy gets back on D and slaps both of his hands on the ground, or is that just an American thing?

"Show some respect to this living legend, this hall of famer...Arvydas Sabonis." - Bill Walton

by tominhawaii on May 5, 2008 5:37 PM PDT up 0 recs

He slaps the ground with both hands...

then wipes each hand with the sole of the opposite shoe (left had with right shoe, and vice versa).

Rudy’s a ghetto gangsta.

by LMA on May 5, 2008 10:37 PM PDT up 0 recs

I agree.

And I think he has also an enourmous and passionate desire for the win, and that passion doesn´t make him lose control or IQ, but motivate him to do all much better .

For meat´s wolf, teeth of dog.

by amlmart1 on May 6, 2008 4:33 AM PDT up 0 recs

That will be Webster's job

Nate done axed him to become one lock down defender. Next year Webster will have to D-up the toughest guy then rest on offense by standing in the corner waiting to bomb a 3 ball. After a year of doing that, he’ll be the dopest!

"Show some respect to this living legend, this hall of famer...Arvydas Sabonis." - Bill Walton

by tominhawaii on May 5, 2008 5:31 PM PDT up 0 recs

"His friends say he's tryin' too hard....

...and he is not quite hip” ”
“But in his own mind he’s…he’s the dopest trip”
“Give it to me, baby!!”

Martell is pretty fly if you ask me

"Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors... and miss" Robert A. Heinlein

by 92wastheyear on May 5, 2008 6:46 PM PDT up 0 recs

Webster and Outlaw's defense about equal?

What game are you guys watching? Maybe last year, but this year Marty has made huge strides on defense. He’s obviously not a “lock down” defender yet but he’s a lot closer to getting there in the next two years than anyone is giving him credit for.

Webster is a big time keeper. Outside of the big three I think he has the best chance of breaking out into something big. This guy is fine at SF, he is only going to get better. I expect another big surge in his game this year and a bigtime breakout season the year after when the team really gets going.

by BlazerD on May 5, 2008 9:13 AM PDT 0 recs

Yeah absolutely right

Webster is really coming along on the defensive end, he’s had some huge blocks this year as well.

KP: You know Mike Rice, Mike Barret you've both been very valuable to us this season. But I'd still trade you both for a couple of 2nd round draft picks.

by Dheepan on May 5, 2008 1:47 PM PDT up 0 recs

Yeah gotta admit

Outlaw may be an outlaw on offense but on defense he’s little more than a scofflaw. Dude needs serious hard work on playing defense.

Marty seems a couple years farther along at the defensive end of the court. Lock down is within the scope of his potential, no doubt.

Where have all the flowers gone?

by bilingual octopus on May 5, 2008 10:45 AM PDT 0 recs

Wouldn't mind either way

If the Blazers let the current recipe simmer or stir the team at SF I wouldn’t mind. The SF’s I would be interested in are: Deng (stock is down buy now, buy now), Granger (maybe more of a scorer than we need), and Childress. I’m find with Webster and I think Outlaw will always be a PF, but I think he fills an imporant role as a scorer off the bench.

Sometimes I feel like I'm going in different directions...

by porterfan30 on May 5, 2008 11:05 AM PDT 0 recs

Agree 100%

We need to let Webster and Outlaw develop and improve their game that will be our best reward.

by billyjoejack on May 5, 2008 4:04 PM PDT 0 recs

Draft insurance!

Unless they’re pushed…...how many more years before they can provide the perimeter
defensive skills, ability to create separation from defender (Webster), and
ability to set up his teammates for easy baskets (assists)
that are needed at SF.

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 4:47 PM PDT up 0 recs

Watch this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMVXnJDBtnI

Tell me Webster isn’t improving off the dribble. That said, he’s not where he needs to be with his handle yet.

We gave Travis five years, the least we can do for Webster is the same. This kid is a lot farther along than Outlaw was at the same stage and he’s already clearly a better defender.

Remember the Cavs games? Who played the best D on Lebron? Webster.

Our starter for the long haul IMO.

On a side note, I love your butte. I live right next to Skinners but I hike Spencers all the time.

by BlazerD on May 5, 2008 5:48 PM PDT up 0 recs

Great rythum in that game.

A flash of promise. To bad it was so rare. youtube can give you a misguided expectation that those flashes are the norm. A tease.

I want that same flash to become commonplace. IMO I don’t think it will without constant pressure.

On a side note. You pass within a 100 yrds of my house each climb.

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 6:19 PM PDT up 0 recs

best D on Lebron???

Remember the Cavs games? Who played the best D on Lebron? Webster.
10 Mar
Lebron: 24pts 10rbs 11a 1st 2bs James Notches 17th Triple Stack of Career
Webster: 7pts 10rbs 0a 0st 0bs

by spencerbutte on May 5, 2008 7:05 PM PDT up 0 recs

Some most unfortunate stats.

When the stats are on your side they are just plain “right.”

When the stats are not in your favor they are “unfortunate.”

Where have all the flowers gone?

by bilingual octopus on May 5, 2008 9:56 PM PDT 0 recs

Webster is our SF

Outlaw is a good off the bench scoring option at SF/PF, but Webster’s team defense and perimter scoring is exactly what the team needs at the position.

I agree with earlier posts that consistency is the big issue. I think its a confidence thing with Martell, coach and the team are right behind him so I see him developing nicely as a reliable option at 3 for us.

by LMA on May 5, 2008 10:42 PM PDT 0 recs