The Season in Review: Travis Outlaw
by Dave on May 14, 2009 1:20 AM PDT
Email
PrintToday we take a look at the ever-controversial Travis Outlaw. We used to call him the Leaping Enigma but he's doing far less leaping and far more long-range shooting nowadays. What do we call him now? The Mystery Bomb?
If you haven't read the conversation guidelines for these threads, please take a look before commenting.
Travis Outlaw's 2008-09 stats:
|
Statistic |
2008-2009 |
2007-2008 |
Net Change |
|
Games Played |
81 |
82 |
-1 |
|
Games Started |
6 |
6 |
--- |
|
Minutes per Game |
27.7 |
26.7 |
+1.0 |
|
Points per Game |
12.8 |
13.3 |
-0.5 |
|
FG ATT per Game |
10.5 |
11.8 |
-1.3 |
|
Field Goal% |
45.3% |
43.3% |
+2.0% |
|
3PT ATT per Game |
2.9 |
1.2 |
+1.7 |
|
Three-Point% |
37.7% |
39.6% |
-1.9% |
|
FT ATT per Game |
3.0 |
3.6 |
-0.6 |
|
Free Throw% |
72.3% |
74.1% |
-1.8% |
|
Off Rebs per Game |
0.9 |
1.2 |
-0.3 |
|
Def Rebs per Game |
3.2 |
3.4 |
-0.2 |
|
TOT Rebs per Game |
4.1 |
4.6 |
-0.5 |
|
Assists |
1.0 |
1.3 |
-0.3 |
|
Steals |
0.6 |
0.7 |
-0.1 |
|
Blocks |
0.7 |
0.8 |
-0.1 |
|
Turnovers |
1.2 |
1.3 |
-0.1 |
|
Personal Fouls |
2.1 |
2.1 |
--- |
|
Effective FG% |
50.5% |
45.3% |
+5.2% |
|
True Shooting% |
54.1% |
49.9% |
+4.2% |
|
PER |
15.1 |
15.7 |
-0.6 |
|
Plus-Minus |
+1.98 |
-1.34 |
+3.32 |
Everybody in the room stand up. Come on, do it. Up!
Good. Now you may sit down if you've ever heard, thought, or (God forbid) said this phrase: "This is the year when we finally find out about Travis Outlaw."
Everybody seated now? Wait...what, sir? No, this is not the Zig Ziglar seminar on finding financial prosperity in rough times. That's down the hall, I believe. What's that? No, we're not hiring. Ben is quite competent and I don't think we need...huh? No, I don't carry any change with me. Ask Zig. Down the hall. Shoo!
Now what were we talking about? Ah yes. This was finally supposed to be the year when we discovered the true value of Travis Outlaw. Which, of course, followed last year which was supposed to be the year when we discovered the true value of Travis Outlaw. Which followed the year before which was supposed...oh, you get the idea.
So what did we find out?
Well, people who like Travis have more reasons to like him after this season. He looked more comfortable in the offense, more confident in his shot, and generally played a smarter offensive game. He upped his field goal percentage by a full 2%, more than doubled his three-point shots while retaining a good percentage, and as a result sent his effective field goal percentage and true shooting percentage through the roof. He was more active in, and attuned to, the defense as well. He made fewer obvious blunders and had some genuinely good defensive outings. His plus-minus spiked positive and the coaching staff found they could genuinely rely on him for consistent minutes, possibly for the first time in his career. Also he's one of a small handful of players on this team who can consistently get good looks on their own. Roy, Aldridge, Bayless, and Outlaw. That's about it. And Bayless doesn't play much. That alone may make Travis Portland's most important bench player.
The people who don't like Travis also found plenty of grist for the mill. One of the things in Travis' favor has been a steady increase in production as his minutes and responsibility have increased. You could always imagine the sky being the limit. Though he didn't get a ton more minutes this year than last, he still played a more significant role than he ever has. His overall production flat-lined. He had fewer points, fewer rebounds, fewer assists...not only in aggregate but per minute. The drops weren't precipitous, but his numbers weren't that astonishing to begin with and the wiggle room isn't that great. Simply put, if this is all there is it isn't enough. If there's more to be had, where is it? And why, after six full seasons now, aren't we seeing it in more than just fits and starts? Travis will be 25 next year and entering his seventh season. There shouldn't be that much speculation about him. We should know more.
Despite having a good personal plus-minus the team scored less and allowed more points when Travis was on the floor than when he was on the bench. Their effective field goal percentage went down and the effective field goal percentage allowed went up. Rebounding went down significantly when Travis played. To pin the entire second unit performance on Travis would be foolish, but when most people think "Travis Outlaw" they envision a difference maker, a game-changer. He didn't really change the game for the Blazers this year. He contributed for sure, but he didn't take control.
One thing we are nailing down is that Travis is getting locked into a power forward role. His PER was 9 points better as a power forward than as a small forward. He won the PER battle by +3.1 at power forward and lost it by that exact amount as a small forward. We saw the fruits of this in the stats mentioned above. Opposing big forwards have a hard time staying with him, especially from the perimeter. But he isn't an adequate rebounder at the four. 81% of his attempts are jumpers as well. That's Rudy Fernandez territory, not power-forward land. Even the new NBA power forward mold you can't have one of your major big guys hanging outside all the time, never getting near the rim, not putting pressure on his defender, and not drawing fouls.
How good is Travis? We don't know.
How good will Travis become? How much room does he have to grow yet? We don't know.
How clearly will his strengths tell as our full-time, back-up power forward and how effectively can we compensate for his weaknesses? We don't know.
How much can we rely on him to perform at a top level every night? We don't know.
How long will it take us to find out the answers to these questions? We don't know.
Unless, of course, the answer is staring us right in the face...in other words if the answer IS "We don't know..." That's a possibility Portland fans and management will have to start giving credence to. It happens. Some guys have gifts and talent but don't ever develop consistency. They'll give you spoonfuls of brilliance but you never get the whole plate. In these cases the following are often true:
1. The guy will have one or two consistently good seasons but it takes a long time to get there and he falls off the wagon afterwards. It isn't sustained.
2. Even those good seasons aren't as good as people envisioned.
3. You just can't win in the meantime and still rely on the guy because this league isn't just about potential greatness, it's about production and performance.
I'm not saying this is the case with Travis, but six years is six years. That's half a career for most good players. It's not that far from half a career even for guys who came into the league at 18. You have to start asking these questions at some point.
Travis may also get caught in a bind because of the team's situation. First and foremost, they need players they can rely on to win games. This is more true now than ever and will continue for the foreseeable future. 54 wins changes things. This isn't anything close to a development squad anymore. To the extent we are still developing players there are higher priorities than Travis. Second, being primarily a power forward means playing primarily behind LaMarcus Aldridge. Minutes will be scarce. If Travis is "all that" he's not going to shine in that situation. If he's not, we might not want to put up with his weaknesses. People were debating this in the Rudy Fernandez thread but there are probably more possibilities open to Rudy and Brandon Roy than there appear to be with LaMarcus and Travis. LaMarcus isn't moving. Travis is showing himself less capable of moving. At what point does that become an impasse?
Doubtless the Blazers value Travis, and rightfully so. He's not a bad player. Sometimes he's a great player. His lows are getting steadily less low. But his average is still average and still involves too much guesswork. The Blazers won't be giving Travis away. He's young, inexpensive, and can get his own shot. Those make him a great value. But if other teams come calling with tempting offers, you'd think the Blazers would be listening. This will be doubly true if they don't see a long-term marriage with him. The Blazers have a contract option on him for 2009-10 at $3.6 million. That's all that remains of his current deal. If they want him back they're going to have to negotiate with him in the coming year which means more years and more money, plus a likely year of Base Year Compensation following during which he pretty much can't be traded. If they're going to move him, doing it this summer might be the safest and simplest option.
On the other hand, what can you get for him? He's not enough to draw a star at this point, even if he's just a key player in a package. But he's got too much value and too much career ahead of him to trade away for a stopgap player. He's a tweener that way. You could go get a guy in the Stromile Swift mold who is just going to cause you the same kind of headaches, but that's not only a lateral move it's a silly one. Travis does fit with this team and he's filling a key role. You might also be able to move up in the draft with a player like Travis, but then you're dealing with youth all over again. It may be more targeted youth at a better position for you, but it's still youth with all the inconsistency the label is heir to.
(sigh) Even in this, Travis is all over the map. There are more polarizing players on the team, but are there any that invoke such a wide range of responses? What are your feelings on the matter? Retain him? Trade him? Ride it out and see what happens? How did you feel about his performance this year? Do you expect more in the future? What do you think are the chances of those expectations being met? Chime in on all things Outlaw-related below.
See more stats at 82Games.com and Basketball-Reference.com.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
179 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think there's a mistake on the plus/minus stat
The change is listed as a positive, but it looks like it should be negative. Just FYI.
There are more polarizing players on the team, but are there any that invoke such a wide range of responses?
Nope. No way. Nuh-uh. But also, there is no more polarizing member of the Blazers than Travis Outlaw.
Not even [name redacted] vs. [other name redacted]. Nor [third name redacted to prevent topic drift].
He does enough to make you think he may grow into a very good player. Then he does something that makes you wish he was in any other town. But not a rival, because Travis could burn us.
He’ll hit the game-winning shot after scoring 10+ in the 4th quarter in one game, then the next game he scores 5 points and zero rebounds in 30 minutes, in a Blazer loss.
He’ll make what looks like a boneheaded shot attempt and miss it badly. Then he’ll run right down court and cut off the passing lane for a steal and a dunk.
Travis giveth and Travis taketh away.
I’ve decided that I’ll leave this in KP’s hands and accept whatever decision he makes, while I wash my hands of the whole thing.
I sure like the guy on a personal level though. Whether in Portland or otherwise, I’ll root for him to do well.
by Timmay! on May 14, 2009 1:37 AM PDT reply actions 4 recs
I agree man.
Having Travis is like being in an abusive relationship.
Trade him? —Damned if you do. Damned if you don’t.
I’ve never been so indecisive about a player.
In KP we trust.
"It's better to have a good player with the basketball in late game situations than to have plays." - R. Pitino
"I asked a ref if he could give me a technical foul for thinking bad things about him. He said, of course not. I said, well, I think you stink. And he gave me a technical. You can't trust em."- Jimmy V
Go Blazers!!
T.O.
Travis is like that dog from little house on the prairie. the on that was a good family pet. He helpp bring in the cows,was good to he kids and protected the place. At the same time he would sneak over and kill the neighbors chickens. so that makes K.P. Mr. Ingalls . can you find a way to fix the bad or do you in the end take the dog behind the woodshed and put him to a humane end.
"I like whatever metric makes a Blazer look better." jonestr
Reporter: Four assists tonight too, Travis. You're starting to shed that idea that you're just a shooter. You're starting to pass the ball more too...
Travis: (Deadpans) Aw, I just got tired..
ruffin from ruffin leaves ruffin
you gotta have somethin…
by farmboy on May 14, 2009 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
he would sneak over and kill the neighbors chickens.
These days, you put the dog on craiglist and rehome him to an owner who lives in the suburbs
Travis to Memphis. No more hassles. Let him live out his NBA career in a no-pressure environment. No more chicken-killing
agree
He’s good enough to make a lot of money playing basketball. He’s not good enough to be a part of our championship-contending team. He’s a Washington General, not a Harlem Globetrotter (although watching Travis dunk for the Globetrotters would be kind of cool)
I agree
Package him for Conley :D
Offseason:
Trade For Mike Conley Jr
Sign Antonio McDyess & Othello Hunter
Draft Kevin Seraphin/Edwin Jackson(Eurostash)
by TheGreatDane17 on May 14, 2009 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Silver Lining
Though he has caused me much anxiety and angst, at least Travis Outlaw is good for a Little House on the Prairie analogy. Any time you can say, “that makes KP Mr. Ingalls” you know you have a fantastic post.
by musicdaniel on May 14, 2009 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions
I feel like Timmay said all there is to say about Travis.
Other than, hey, I like the guy.
You really can’t sum it up better than this:
Travis giveth and Travis taketh away.
2 hot 2 stop it
Yep, consistently inconsistent
It all averages out to a good, not great 6th man. Keeping Outlaw isn’t going to hurt us, moving Outlaw isn’t going to hurt us. Keeping Outlaw gives us a nice scorer off the bench, but moving him might net us a difference maker.
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
How many 6th men are better in the league?
I think he is bordering on being a “great 6th man”. There are very few people who can come off the bench and give us his kind of scoring. Yes he occasionally disappears, but so do most 6th men (Ginobli doesn’t count) and quite a few starters.
You don’t get all-stars to come off the bench.
+1
"What's so interesting is that this team took on a dynamic that was very special. I don't think we as a group, in terms of management, coaches and players, realize what we did as a young team. We broke all the metrics. We broke all the molds. Our challenge is can we continue to do that. As young of a team with 54 wins, no issues off the court, phenomenal chemistry." - Kevin Pritchard
Amen!
How do you solve a problem like Travis???? lingering Sound of Music notes drifting through my mind…
Let’s hope KP’s got the solution!
Little House on the Prairie and Sound of Music?
I don’t think any other Blazer has sparked such analogies. :) Next will be a Chitty-chitty-bang-bang reference.
"...we have so many experts who think that you have to play defense, you have to rebound, you have to be a possession coach, you have to execute. I just laugh. Explosive offense is not as intimidating as dominant defense. But it is scary when you don't know how to stop someone." - George Karl, Nuggets coach
Amen!
How do you solve a problem like Travis???? lingering Sound of Music notes drifting through my mind…
Let’s hope KP’s got the solution!
You got it...
This is where I am too. Love the guy…but someone else has to decide….it is above my pay grade
nice redaction
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
Since when did KP ask any of us for advice?
“I’ve decided that I’ll leave this in KP’s hands and accept whatever decision he makes, while I wash my hands of the whole thing.”
What’s up with that? A little too much self-importance don’t you think?
Travis Outlaw and Steve Blake are moved for Kirk Hinrich, end of story.
Let’s just get this done as quicky as possible, for we can move on from that.
while that's nice and all
I demand Rubi-o, Rubi-o, Ru-bi-oooooooo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Um8mMa5w41A
(first 20 seconds or so)
I still don’t think Hinrich is the answer
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
That would take a massive Pritch slap
I can’t see us getting the #2 pick without giving up a lot more than Outlaw and Blake.
Completely agree that Hinrich isn’t the answer.
especially at his price
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
It is quite likely that I missed the discussion.
So this question may have been asked and answered before. But why does Chicago do this?It sounds like they would rather keep Hinrich in a backup role than trade him for “Hinrich lite” and Tyrus Thomas’s backup.
Of all the things that can be expressed in the printed word – love, hate, fear, joy – true humor is the one that is the most difficult of all. Sarcasm, for example, is an art of delicate subtlety. Yet too many people wield it as a bulldozer – loud, smelly, ugly, and destructive – and think they are being funny.
Because, you know, Tyrus Thomas is better than Lamarcus Aldridge.
Of all the things that can be expressed in the printed word – love, hate, fear, joy – true humor is the one that is the most difficult of all. Sarcasm, for example, is an art of delicate subtlety. Yet too many people wield it as a bulldozer – loud, smelly, ugly, and destructive – and think they are being funny.
what?
bayless leaves over my dead body
by thomasikehara on May 14, 2009 7:21 AM PDT up reply actions
From Chicago's perspective.
Of all the things that can be expressed in the printed word – love, hate, fear, joy – true humor is the one that is the most difficult of all. Sarcasm, for example, is an art of delicate subtlety. Yet too many people wield it as a bulldozer – loud, smelly, ugly, and destructive – and think they are being funny.
The Bulls have their own issues with TT
The Bulls don’t know how to use Thomas; Outlaw would be a better fit for them, and they could use Thomas in a trade to get them someone we need.
We need Hinrich. HIs defense and penetration skills were what we missed from the pg position last year.
I second the trade: Outlaw and Blake for Hinrich.
by Jackalope 66 on May 14, 2009 7:50 AM PDT up reply actions
You left out Viktor Khryapa!
"What's so interesting is that this team took on a dynamic that was very special. I don't think we as a group, in terms of management, coaches and players, realize what we did as a young team. We broke all the metrics. We broke all the molds. Our challenge is can we continue to do that. As young of a team with 54 wins, no issues off the court, phenomenal chemistry." - Kevin Pritchard
for cap reasons
Chicago can’t resign Ben Gordon unless they get rid of Hinrich’s contract. Travis and Steve both have nonguaranteed deals… they could very well be cut.
draft rodrigue beaubois
Ah, to avoid Luxury Tax.
So it’s Gordon or Hinrich. Thank you for explaining that.
Of all the things that can be expressed in the printed word – love, hate, fear, joy – true humor is the one that is the most difficult of all. Sarcasm, for example, is an art of delicate subtlety. Yet too many people wield it as a bulldozer – loud, smelly, ugly, and destructive – and think they are being funny.
If I'm Ben Gordon's agent, then I'd attempt to get Chicago and Oklahoma City in a bidding war.
“Regarding Ben Gordon, a six-year, $90,000,000 contract (Signing Bonus: $18,000,000; … 2009-2010: $6,000,000; 2010-2011: $6,600,000; 2011-2012: $7,200,000; 2012-2013: $7,800,000; 2013-2014: $8,400,000; 2014-2015: $9,000,000; Deferred Compensation: $27,000,000) — with a 20% signing bonus paid upfront (yet spread out over the contract for salary cap puposes) and 30% deferred compensation that’s paid out in proportional installments from 2015-2016 through 2020-2021 (yet spread out over the contract for salary cap puposes) — is a possible deal for him if he gets the Chicago Bulls in a bidding war with the Oklahoma City Thunder for his services. While I personally think that would be a vast overpayment for Gordon, I could see him lucking out like Rashard Lewis did during the summer of 2007.”
In the end, ultimately, I envision Gordon re-signing with the Bulls this July for a boatload of money.
Okay, let me further elaborate on this sidebar topic.
Regarding Ben Gordon, a five-year, $75,000,000 contract (Signing Bonus: $15,000,000; 2009-2010: $7,750,000; 2010-2011: $8,370,000; 2011-2012: $8,990,000; 2012-2013: $9,610,000; 2013-2014: $10,230,000; Deferred Compensation: $15,050,000) — with a 20% signing bonus paid upfront (yet spread out over the contract for salary cap puposes) and 20.067% deferred compensation that’s paid out in proportional installments from 2014-2015 through 2018-2019 (yet spread out over the contract for salary cap puposes) — would hypothetically be what he’d receive from the Oklahoma City Thunder due to any franchise other than the Chicago Bulls only being able to offer him a five-year, maximum-level contract with 8% annual raises.
On a side note, I’m not sure if that contract will fit within the parameters of the NBA collective bargaining agreement since the maximum-level salary for a player with five years years tenured experience — which was $13,758,000 this season (i.e., 1/4 of 48.04% of the projected BRI rather than 1/4 of the $58,680,000 salary cap, which was 51% of the projected BRI) — will not be determined until after the July moratorium. As it stands, though, the cap hit in Gordon’s first season of that contract I proposed above would be $13,760,000 (i.e., $7,750,000 base salary + $3,000,000 signing bonus allotment + $3,010,000 deferred compensation allotment).
On another note, if I’m an agent I’d find it to be in the best interest of my client(s) to receive a signing bonus and deferred compensation instead of a monstrous base salary. That upfront signing bonus could do wonders for the life of a NBA player at that moment, while the deferred compensation that kicks in after the contract ends would provide financial security.
Oh, if there’s any miscalculations in my post, it’d be awesome for somebody like Storyteller or Norsktroll to point that out to me.
I don't know that the guy with the money likes Ben enough to get in a bidding war
Reportedly last year the Bulls gave Ben a deadline on the contract offer they had made, take it or we withdraw it kind of thing. Ben did not accept it by the deadline but reportedly tried to accept it afterwards and the Bulls would not put the contract offer back out.
I could be wrong, obviously, but I don’t know how much negotiating they’re going to do with him this year after not really negotiating at all the last two.
Man-slave, bring me my PB&J!
The Chicago Bulls were in a stronger position of negotiating with Ben Gordon due ...
to him being a restricted free-agent — which meant that the team could match any offer sheet he might’ve conceivably signed with a team — so it didn’t hurt to wait it out until he gave in and signed the one-year qualifying offer. This time around, however, Gordon is an unrestricted free-agent and can possibly earn a big payday by getting the Chicago Bulls into a bidding war with a team like the Oklahoma City Thunder.
Yet, even if the Bulls trade Kirk Hinrich prior to the July moratorium and Gordon leaves via free agency this summer, the Bulls would still have Luol Deng and John Salmons starting at the wing positions. At any rate, though, it’ll be an interesting off-season for the Bulls.
No, I realize that.
There’s some question out there as to whether Jerry Reinsdorf even wants Ben around is what I’m saying. There have been conflicting rumors lately (aren’t there always?); one that the Bulls are willing to pay the tax for this year to resign Ben and keep the team together, and one that the Bulls intend to let Ben walk. There have been rumors forever that Reinsdorf just does not care for Ben much and greatly prefers Kirk Hinrich and Luol Deng, which is why you hear Ben fans talk so often about how he’s been jerked around by the org.
So what I’m saying is Ben only gets his bidding war if the Bulls are willing to engage in it – because otherwise it’s just whatever offer OKC (or whoever) throws out. I can absolutely imagine the Bulls making an offer and telling Ben that’s it – if he wants to stay a Bull take it, and if not have a nice career. Maybe his agent can get two other teams going at it, or maybe the offer the Bulls make turns out to be the best with the economy the way it is and all, but given the history with Ben I have a hard time picturing the Bulls jumping into any sort of bidding war.
Like I said, I could be quite wrong. This is just how I feel based on info that’s been made public and the rumors that float around, and I have absolutely nothing that even remotely could be considered inside info.
Man-slave, bring me my PB&J!
+1
Rubio may turn out to be a great player, but we know what Hinrich brings to the table from day one. And it’s more than we are currently getting from our PG’s. Why gamble with another young guy. We are a PG away from contention now. (plus there is that whole Kansas connection. I bet KP has had his eye on Hinrich since he lost his starting spot to Rose…)
by ClydeTheGlyde on May 14, 2009 6:44 AM PDT up reply actions
I want both
Rubio can be Hinrich’s backup for a couple years. How do we get them both? Umm… in KP I trust!
Point guards take time to develop
and we’re not in the player development business any longer, as Dave wrote. The only way I would want us to get Rubio — were that even possible, which it is not — is if he turns out to be the next Magic Johnson or Chris Paul.
by MiledAnimal on May 14, 2009 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions
in an open thread a while back, Dave said that he would be ok with getting a young point guard and going through development, provided it was a player of Rubio’s talent level.
draft rodrigue beaubois
Technically
I am very much against going with a young point guard outside of perhaps a third-guard back-up developmental role. We’ve had enough years of that already. (Telfair, Jack, Sergio, now Bayless…please let one turn out OK!) However what I’d say is that if the Blazers do bank on a young PG again, he’d BETTER be all that and a bag of chips. And not no Olestra chips either. Full fat, crunchy, and packed with flavah. If Rubio is that, so be it, but I would be assuming that management was thinking he was EXACTLY that good if they went and got him (or any other young point guard). Especially since the price to move up to a place where we could get RR would likely be quite high.
—Dave
They moved up for Bayless
I think that shows they feel he’s going to be all that and a bag of chips. And by “they” I mean KP.
"...we have so many experts who think that you have to play defense, you have to rebound, you have to be a possession coach, you have to execute. I just laugh. Explosive offense is not as intimidating as dominant defense. But it is scary when you don't know how to stop someone." - George Karl, Nuggets coach
What do we get from Hinrich that we don't get from Blake?
I don’t see it. In pretty much every statisical category, Blake comes out ahead. Having watched them both, I’m not in love with either, but Blake is solid.
I certainly wouldn’t trade one of the leagues best bench scorers and a serviceable PG who is already part of our culture for a very similar level player.
A point guard who can...
push the ball and run the break. Steve has problems finishing in the open court. He’s a good passer, but that is when he is trailing. We need a point guard to lead the fast break.
It doesn't matter who they vote for. As long as I get to pick who's running.
J.D. Rockefeller
I don't write checks, straight cash homey...
Randy Moss
For game winning shots
Travis has been the best in teh league by far:
http://www.82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm
I love statistical systems
back to back posts, one saying that Travis is one of the most clutch players in the league and the other saying he’s one of the worst players on the team.
By the same poster no less.
Of all the things that can be expressed in the printed word – love, hate, fear, joy – true humor is the one that is the most difficult of all. Sarcasm, for example, is an art of delicate subtlety. Yet too many people wield it as a bulldozer – loud, smelly, ugly, and destructive – and think they are being funny.
Doesn't that sum up Travis altogether...
At some point you’ll think to yourself, “this guy is the most clutch guy (not on the team) in the LEAGUE”…and then other times you think to yourself, “this guy is killing us, he has to be the worst player on our team”
Take away Nate's addiction, trade Travis Outlaw.
I want Kirk Hinrich!!!!!
Hi Mr. Ziglar, Mr. Pritchard, I'm Suze Orman, do you have credit card debt?
KP: No Suze, because Travis Outlaw is incredibly cheap for what he does.
You know at the deadline I almost splurged on Richard Jefferson (®Real Baller FattySealof*Approval), Vince Carter or Luol Deng. But then I found out they do about the same at two or three times the price and/or mileage. We really wanted Deng for a while, a player in the same age and experience group as Travis. But he has been consistently bad from outside and has taken just a tiny fraction of Travis shots from there. He is also more "injury-prone". As much as I hate that label, Travis is many things but that he is not. Deng also has a nasty habit to disappear late in games when it matters, while Travis actively looks for the ball and his shot. Let’s see how they compare Suze:
Single season (look at for 36 minutes numbers) http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/tiny.cgi?id=NVL55
Career http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/tiny.cgi?id=GIfn5
Yes, Deng plays better defense and gets 1 or 2 rebounds more (per game or per 36 minutes) over his career. But the Bulls have now secured his services seemingly forever at the following price tag beginning next season: $10,365,000; $11,345,000; $12,325,000; $13,365,000; $14,275,000. That is steep, huh? Similar with Jefferson and Carter.
There are small forwards in the league I would love to have (Granger, Prince, Butler, Wallace, …). But since those are not available for cheap, we can be very happy with what Travis brings. I think we can extend him to a similar deal like Martell got. And if not, a few opposing GMs would run the doors of the front office in to get that player as their sixth man if we put out a "for sale" sign. If we need the cap room for a trade, Memphis would love to pick up Travis for a future first round pick. So we will pick up his next year 99% sure.
"Officiating has to be a science, not an art" - Rick Carlisle
by Norsktroll on May 14, 2009 6:46 AM PDT reply actions 10 recs
Nice rebuttal...
I disagree. I can’t stand the anxiety, the unfuflfilled promise, and the sidways/fading/spinning jumpers. But very nice rebuttal. You almost had me.
Buck Williams for the hall of fame
Travis contract amazes me
We have the wealthiest owner in the NBA yet our management seems to be one of the few that signs its own FAs to reasonably priced contracts (prime examples are Blake, Trout and Webster). In a way this hurts as other teams will value a player less if he is really underpaid, but at the same time that’s really valuable to the team that hold those contracts. Also it make sgettting fair value in a trade more difficult. My point is that our contracts are very atttractive but to upgade a player, the upgrade player is likely to be overpaid and so we must give up more players/talent to match salaries (this is why rookie are rarely traded).
As for Trout the player, I love him but he’s not a game changer and probably never will be. He has grown more consistent but I think we are looking at what will be his carrer stats. 12-14 pts per game and 4-5 rbs per game. That’s not bad but it’s not outstanding. He should get better defensively over time and has shown much improvement but still has lapses. But the real ire with Trout, is that he lacks a killer instinct and that is what makes him so polarizing since he can be very clutch but tis not in him to be that way all the time.
I think he’ll be held up until the trade deadline because we should be able o oget good return for him at that point (a servicable player with a cheap expiring contract in the summer of 2010). That me very well be the reason we hold onto our extra cap sapce this summer to make an unbalanced trade during next season. I’d hate to see him go but his role needs to be greater than the spots mintues he’d get behind Lma. And since he is not suited in our offense to excell as a SF, we’d be better off trading him for a better fit for a 6th man.
I think his role would be similar to Josh Smith or Gerald Wallace if he realizes his full potential. The funny thing is that those two don’t have a reliable outside shot, but use their athletic ability better to grab rebounds and block shots.
"Officiating has to be a science, not an art" - Rick Carlisle
I think his role would be similar to Josh Smith or Gerald Wallace if he realizes his full potential
Yeah… but this entire polarizing discussion and thread is due to those last 6 words.
Could not agree
MORE!
Killer instinct. When you have your opponent down, you do not help them up. You step on their throat!!!!!!
by Misplaced Blazermaniac on May 14, 2009 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Exactly, Norsk-baby!
Since the only thing that Travis gives consistently is inconsistency, he is a very good six/seventh man material to change up the game. (Okay he is consistently poor defending in the halfcourt and as a rebounder — so much for consistency.) One day he’s a world beater, destroying Boston without BRoy’s help, the next he’s a lost soul.
So the problem comes down to how to utilize him. He often elevates (his game and his frame) in crunch time. He is like an offensive closer, like a pinch hitter you bring in when you need run production or want that spark. He makes the coach and GM look like a genius or an idiot.
Travis is also frustrating because he does everything wrong. But it is right for him. He hits those turning floaters, while Rudy doesn’t. I would like him to keep aware of his assignment if the guy can shoot, but I would prefer if he did not even try to play post defense. Just harass the opponent and intend to outjump the guy out of position for the block. As far as basketball IQ, Travis is a genius and a complete moron, but as much of it comes from his body as his mind. He will probably never be a good classic post defender.
I don’t think that we can get value for him. He earns the minutes he gets, and that will continue. With Martell back, Travis should earn less minutes. I see him moving down the bench the better we get unless he can improve his defense and rebounding, but if he accepts that role, I think he will be very valuable in it.
Besides, he makes BRoy laugh.
Let's just be happy with what we have and not expect anything more
A good 6th or 7th man who sometimes helps you and sometimes doesn’t. The trick here now is that you can’t force feed him minutes like we have in the past. If he comes in the game and is lighting it up, then play him. If he comes in the game and is providing energy, defense and rebounding but his shot is off, then play him. If he is off on his shooting and not providing anything else, then give him the quick hook.
His role should be of explosive scorer off the bench who helps us at times and doesn’t at times. But never a large dose if he doesn’t have it.
If Nate can play him like that then no harm in keeping him and he can provide a lift at times.
"I saw him in the face" Sergio's quote on the latest alley-oop to Rudy.
by blazermaniac32 on May 14, 2009 6:49 AM PDT reply actions 8 recs
+1
Of all the things that can be expressed in the printed word – love, hate, fear, joy – true humor is the one that is the most difficult of all. Sarcasm, for example, is an art of delicate subtlety. Yet too many people wield it as a bulldozer – loud, smelly, ugly, and destructive – and think they are being funny.
I would be less frustrated with Travis's role if he didn't play during crunch time
If you need him the last play of the game to get a shot off, which you know he can do, fine. But it’s tough to have a guy who can’t make good decisions on the floor the last five or six minutes of a close game.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on May 14, 2009 7:06 AM PDT up reply actions
100% agree
He is valuable for the last couple of possessions because he can get off his shot and has proven that he can hit them. But prior to that in Q4 play him if he is hot and contributing elsewhere otherwise he rides the pines.
"I saw him in the face" Sergio's quote on the latest alley-oop to Rudy.
by blazermaniac32 on May 14, 2009 7:10 AM PDT up reply actions
i like martell but i don't think he's ever hit a clutch shot in the nba
and in fact in those situations he runs from the ball. because if he shot and missed it might mess up his fragile self-esteem. better to avoid the risk.
ignacio
So whose fault is that ??
The “problem” with Travis is not the problem with Travis. We are talking excellent value bench player here. And sometimes he is great during crunch time. At least he is not dull! Coach makes the decisions of what the team needs on the floor. Yeah, he had a crummy playoffs. And Houston’s defense may have had something to do with tough decisions. But that was new for the whole team. I was dissappointed in him, yeah. I’m sure he was more dissapointed, never mind if he didn’t do a lot of public crying about it. We would like to have another option, sure. Actually, we presumably do (Webster).
Until Travis “goes Sergio”, and starts bellyaching about not enough playing time, he is a great asset to have. And yeah, it helps that I personally like the guy, his family, etc. That is an essential piece for my “fanship”. Just winning with whoever, regardless of what an arrogant jerk he is, doesn’t work for me. Travis is a “glue guy” with great natural gifts, that you can’t “learn”. We “don’t know” about Travis. So what’s the rush to get rid of him? You want somone better, get him an demonstrate what he can do. If we really don’t have a use for Travis, then he can go, at that point to his own benefit, as he could be a key player for somebody who needs him. And, in that case, someday we will probably be bemoaning the damage he does to us from the other side. I am reminded of the grass is always greener.
Travis is and integral part of our team “chemistry”, I enjoy him on the team. I like the Travis drama. And I tend to believe KP understands this. I think I got Roy in my corner on this fight. So, sure, if some golden key trade opportunity comes up where Travis is an essential piece, he may go. But this “tossing him in” on whatever whimsical trade someone thinks up is fortunately not what is going to happen.
by Berkeley on May 14, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
+1
Very well said Berkeley – Elgin
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
I see Travis as becoming less important and more pigeonholed
as a streak-shooter off the bench as the Blazers refine the roster. What’s a player like that worth, $2 million a year? That would be about half of what he will make next year, so I doubt he’d go for it. But if KP can sign him for whatever is a good deal for the team I have no problem with Travis staying long-term.
by MiledAnimal on May 14, 2009 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions
I feel the same way.
That is pretty much my only complaint about Nate. It seems as though he has a love affair with Travis and let’s him play far too much when he isn’t producing ANYTHING and is basically an extra body on the court. I can’t figure it out for the life of me why Nate will continue to play him when there could possibly be a better option (i.e. Batum who you know would at least provide defense consistently).
Nate needs to have the same rules for everyone. If you’re not doing what you’re supposed to, or even trying to do what you’re supposed to do, you get yanked. Just ask Sergio-it happens to him all the time.
Well what were the options?
When Martell went down for the season, that really opened the gate for Outlaw to be able to “play through his ups and downs”… what other options did we have? Maybe some more Channing Frye? I would have been okay with that, seeing that Channing had about the same roller-coaster of consistency as Travis, just with far fewer opportunities. I think Channing, at 25, still has plenty of game to be a “Travis” bench scorer or even a starting PF for some team (Heck, New Jersey starts Ryan Anderson at the 4!). But with this years Blazers team, Nate had the choice between rookie A – Nic Batum, rookie B – Rudy Fernandez, Channing Frye or sticking with Travis Outlaw. And to Travis’ credit, we have all seen Travis come thru in the clutch plenty of times for a coach and teammates to have confidence in him… seriously though, what other options were there?
by Portland Dynasty on May 14, 2009 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions
"Let's just be happy with what we have and not expect anything more "
Sure, but let’s be open to the possibility that we might wind up with something more. In no way is an athlete close to hitting his ceiling at 24 or 25 years old.
So if we like what we have in Travis enough to keep him for the 6th man spot, maybe we will be rewarded, and surprised even, by holding on to him. – Elgin
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
after 6 years, NBA players have essentially shown who they are in the vast majority of cases
Not all cases, but the vast majority of them.
throw out the first three years
when he couldn’t get off the bench to save his life. Maybe after 3 years, the percentage is 50/50? What is the percentage of 24-year-olds? – Elgin
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
And I believe in Travis case the gains
Will be what they have been the last couple of years. Small changes but nothing to take him to the next level. That’s why I think it’s time for us to appreciate what Travis is, which is a sometimes really good 6th man.
"I saw him in the face" Sergio's quote on the latest alley-oop to Rudy.
by blazermaniac32 on May 14, 2009 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions
A good 6th or 7th man....
Travis IS a good 6th or 7th man and his stats prove that. Is he the answer to the starting SF? Definitely not. Is he the answer to the backup PF? this one is a NO as well… Is Travis Outlaw a reasonably priced, serviceable Enigma? Yes. Travis has had a pretty big role over the past two seasons, and IF he sticks around, I can see that role diminishing as Channing Frye is replaced by a more ferocious post player at the backup 4… whom Travis would split time with depending on matchups. Now at 4.5M, in my opinion he is worth keeping around. Especially if his slow and steady improvements keep coming. He will never that 6th Man of the Year like too many expectations were focused on, but he is definitely a serviceable gamer who can provide points and momentum off the bench. Just think how much better it would be knowing that Nate could pull Travis at any time to plug in veteran Antonio McDyess?
The one thing about Tavis that NO ONE is talking about is how Travis Outlaw does provide great insurance at the starting PF in case of any injuries to LaMarcus Aldridge. That is the one thing that gets over looked when everyone is talking about the “Log-Jam” at the Small Forward. Let’s get over Trout being a SF, and realize he is a role player PF…. and he is going to take a hit on minutes because he isn’t the rebounder or defender we need in the post/paint with the second unit. BUT, his unique skills and reasonable price make him a great asset. I still want LESS moves to our roster this off-season, and that includes keeping Trout for these reasons.
by Portland Dynasty on May 14, 2009 8:29 PM PDT up reply actions
I think I would rather see him stay than go.
But I’m hoping that Rudy replaces him as the third scoring option. Or even Webster. But I don’t know if Outlaw would be okay with a role that doesn’t rely on him quite as much. Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn’t I have no idea. But it’s tough to rely on the fluctuations in Outlaw’s game for as much as we did this year.
As Norsktroll pointed out above, he is very affordable. And he gives a lot at that price point. His production capacity at #7 on our depth chart is not bad at all.
Of all the things that can be expressed in the printed word – love, hate, fear, joy – true humor is the one that is the most difficult of all. Sarcasm, for example, is an art of delicate subtlety. Yet too many people wield it as a bulldozer – loud, smelly, ugly, and destructive – and think they are being funny.
It's already all been said, you either are willing to overlook his obvious deficiencies or you're not
Pros:
- Can get a shot off at any time
- Good three point shooter
- Reasonably capable one-on-one defender
- Good chemistry guy
Cons:
- Completely lost when it comes to help defense
- Poor rebounder for his size/leaping ability
- Poor basketball IQ
- Poor shot selection
- Poor passer
- Lacks an interior game / does not get to the free throw line
- Tends to panic when pressed
I expect the Blazers to re-sign him to a resonable deal then trade him at some point.
Blazer Fan
Here's an Intangible for you:
I keep hearing that BRoy and Outlaw are best friends. LIke BFFs.
Let’s assume that’s the case.
I want to get Trout off the team rather badly. He’s hard on my nerves. But here’s something that changes my mind: what if Brandon Roy requires that Trout stay in town in order to stay with Portland at a reasonable contract?
I never specifically hear about things like that… but do they happen? It was implied with the Spanish Armada when Rudy was coming and it was implied with Conley and Oden.
What do we do if Roy insists that KP keep Trout around? He’s the only player on the team with that kind of power.
If he is in that position, someone (Nate/KP) would have to somehow demonstrate to BRoy that retaining Trout would cost BRoy a title: friendship v title.
(Then I start wondering if I would package up BRoy and Trout for Chris Paul. Starting back court of Chris Paul and Rudy might be interesting.)
Buck Williams for the hall of fame
i dont think thatroy is that big of a baby to get mad when his friend gets traded
rudy wont demand out when sergio gets traded, oden isnt demanding a trade to Memphis to play with conley
bayless leaves over my dead body
by thomasikehara on May 14, 2009 7:24 AM PDT up reply actions
I've said it before and I'll say it again
who were BFFs on those Nelson Mavs teams? Dirk and Nash. Cuban refuses to re-sign Nash and instead replaces him with a rookie PG, then what happens? They combine to win the next three MVPs, in two of the three years one of their teams has the best record in the league, and Dirk signs an extension despite Cuban letting his boy go earlier.
This Brandon-Trout thing is such a non-story.
Did you really do that?
Did you really just suggest that we trade B Roy? That is absolute lunacy. I can’t believe I’m actually dignifying the comment with a response.
by ClydeTheGlyde on May 14, 2009 8:00 AM PDT up reply actions
Yes, to hurt nobody's feelings we should fire Nate, trade Roy and Travis to Memphis and build around Sergio, O.J. Mayo and Rudy
"Officiating has to be a science, not an art" - Rick Carlisle
Yeah the Hornets are gonna trade Paul
If thats the case lets be greedy give Trout ,Rudy & sergio +draftpicks our bench might be weaker but who cares I smell titles
I love Trout
> (Then I start wondering if I would package up BRoy and Trout for Chris Paul. Starting back court of Chris Paul and Rudy might be interesting.)
I love Trout and especially BRoy, but I’d throw Blake (who I also love) in on that deal if the Hornets wanted to do that. – Elgin
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
Kevin Pritchard said friendships do not play a role in choosing players
on Courtside. And thank God for that. I think that is the lamest excuse for not getting rid of someone.
It’s kind of like when you’re a little kid and your dad got a job in another state. You don’t want to move because your best friend doesn’t live there. You’re parents say you’ll get over it, and sure enough, you make a new best friend in a matter of days. Same thing goes for grown adults that play professional basketball.
I think Roy and everyone else in the NBA is grown up enough to be able to live without one of their friends on the team. There are more important things to worry about than if they are going to be separated from a friend (i.e. winning). Besides, there are 13 other people on the team he can become BFFs with.
That's only half true
What if your dad moved you to a place and all the guys who already lived there were like fatty, AK1984, howlingfantods, homerandflanders, and Idog1976? It doesn’t matter if you find a new best friend in days, if you and your best friend are surrounded by “you know whats,” it sucks. Luckily the Blazers have great culture, and hopefully if they make a trade, they don’t trade away a swell guy for an Eddy Haskel.
Man, that would totally suck.
But luckily I’m a girl so hopefully they would be more like annthefan, BlazerFan1, Corvid, Claire, and Section323 :)
that would be awesome
Could I move to y’all’s neighborhood? – Elgin
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
Don't trade Outlaw to upgrade at his spot.
Trade him if we must in a package to get a significant upgrade at another position.
Mostly, I prefer he stay on the team.
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
Also: COMCAST SUCKS!
I firmly believe Nic is the SF of the future
and we all know LMA will be playing 38 minutes a game at the 4.
I’m an advocate of trying to use Travis to upgrade another position, namely the point. Chicago would probably be very interested in his nonguaranteed contract.
draft rodrigue beaubois
Hence Blake/Outlaw for Hinrich
And then draft a backup PF who can play for 10 minutes. Assume that this year, Martell doesn’t go out for 81.9 games.
Call me crazy, but I think Chicago doesn't need Travis and we can pull off the Hinrich trade without him
"Officiating has to be a science, not an art" - Rick Carlisle
We can make lopsided trades with about $6.7 million in cap space. Subtract Blake's $4 million, and it's enough for Hinrich (plus picks)
"Officiating has to be a science, not an art" - Rick Carlisle
O.K.
If thats the case do we want to give up all that space for Hinrich 10 mil. is he really twice as good as Blake, seems like alot for a say 15% upgrade
by We-B-Dunkin on May 14, 2009 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions
Dave hit it on the head somewhere in there...
It permeates Daves take on Travis. He’s a tweener, a tweener in every aspect of his game and career. As a player he’s a tweener 3 or 4. He’s a tweener in market value. He’s a tweener in most every thing I can think of.
Should you keep him? What can you get for him? The answer is all muddled up in that grey area tween black and white. The problem with tweeners is that sometimes they’re exactly what you need to plug the hole and sometimes they are the hole.
To win championships with them you have to get lucky that at that crucial moment they plug the hole. KP doesn’t strike me as a man who enjoys relying on luck.
sig test
"The problem with tweeners is that sometimes they’re exactly what you need to plug the hole and sometimes they are the hole."
LaughingJon
Minutes for Small Forwards, Banging Power Forwards
With Martel coming back and the general consensus that we’ll want at least one more banger in our second unit, there aren’t enough minutes for Travis, Martell, Batum, a new PF and Rudy.
One of them will be very unhappy or one of them will be out of here. So either we don’t target a backup power forward or we lose one rotation player. Of the rotation players, Travis is the most likely to go.
Let me make the case for Matt Barnes
As we know, there could be four roster spots open next year. It makes sense to fill them with a mix of cheap veterans and maybe not as cheap rookies. Assuming that Travis has already fullfilled his potential and it might be a good time to move him, a cheaper and (I think) better replacement can be had to play the backup 3/4 forward spots; Matt Barnes. Matt is not quite the shooter that Travis is, but he makes up for it by being a better rebounder, passer, and defender. He’s a hard-nosed competitive type; Fatty might even call him a “baller”.
He played for the Suns for $1.2M last year. I doubt he would command much more than that this year.
we don't need another tweener who can take away minutes from Nic and Martell at the 3
Take away Nate's addiction, trade Travis Outlaw.
I want Kirk Hinrich!!!!!
barnes looks like a better player on the suns than he did on the warriors
which isn’t saying much. he’s streaky, and seems like a ruffian who can’t make layups on a fastbreak very consistently.
"The problem with tweeners is that sometimes they’re exactly what you need to plug the hole and sometimes they are the hole."
-LaughingJon
I like Barnes' game.
It was weird that his name wasn’t mentioned in the whole small forward discussion last year (or was it the year before that?) when he was a free agent and the Blazers needed a 3.
Changing my opinion
Immediately after the playoffs I was ready to see Travis go but now in looking at the whole resume I feel he is a keeper. Travis needs to do what Brandon did last year and work on the floaters and finishes near the rim that don’t involve dunking. He did not look confident going to the hole in the Houston series.
Someone in a previous thread was calling Travis a lazy player, I think the exact opposite is true. He seems to be a slow learner who has compensated by working hard on individual skills. He can control all the variables on the jump shot. He has identified how he can best help the team and filled his role well. Given the fact that he has brought us a little more each year, he is good for chemistry and is affordable it seems that he is worth holding.
by Jacksonville on May 14, 2009 8:53 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I agree with most of what has been said.
However, the ability to hit shots at the end of a game is rare. The Blazers need people who can do that. Travis can do that. Travis should stay. He is a winner.
I could be wrong now. But I don't think so!
by Kampeska on May 14, 2009 8:55 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
I've been saying that all year, too
And I expected him to really be a crunch-time player in the playoffs — but he wasn’t. Will he rise to the occasion next year? If not, I think Rudy becomes the other crunch-time guy (or Future Bayless might), and Travis is a little more expendable.
Sticking up for Travis Outlaw since 2008.
Actually there is a difference
You have guys who can “create” their own shots at the end of games and there are guys who can “hit” shots at the end of games. Great teams only need one guy to create shots at the games (Bulls – Jordan, L*kers – Kobe, Miami – Wade, Celtics – Pierce etc.). Great teams also need 2-3 guys who can hit shots at the end of games (Bulls – Pippen/Kerr/Paxson/Grant, Laker – Fisher/Fox/Horry Celtics – Allen/KG etc).
Travis is a guy who can create shots at end of games, and yes can hit shots at end of games. His ability to create shots does not need to be replaced, we already have Roy for that. His ability to hit shots can much easliy be replaced (Martell, new PG, Blake etc).
I like the guy, as a guy, I find myself too frustrated in big games to continue to feel comfortable having him play big minutes.
Take away Nate's addiction, trade Travis Outlaw.
I want Kirk Hinrich!!!!!
Travis leaves over Ben's dead body.
I’m not willing to die for any of the players, but I am willing to let you have Ben if you feel like a sacrifice is needed.
Travis is my favorite personality on the team.
I don’t want him to go for two reason:
1. Blazers fans aren’t happy unless they have at least one Blazer to hate, and they need a scapegoat. That is Outlaw’s role and if he’s gone, fans might turn on Rudy or Batum.
2. I love his bad shots that go in and don’t go in, because it makes people mad.
In summary, I think Travis is who he is. I don’t think his shot selection will get better but I think he can get better at deciding to pass or take an Outlaw shot. I think his defense can improve too. I can see him getting squeezed out and the team not needing to depend on him as much in the future. If he does get traded, I will always love him and definitely will be sad to see him go.
by tominhawaii on May 14, 2009 9:09 AM PDT reply actions 6 recs
Re #1: Steve Blake, hello!
And Jerryd’s short arms.
by MiledAnimal on May 14, 2009 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions
But all that hate concentrated on Blake...
might culminate in a lynching.
Why do you say we need a scapegoat?
Who was the scapegoat in the glory years? Cliff Robinson? Mark Bryant? Alaa Abdelnaaby (sp?)
I think people didn’t like Telfair because he couldn’t finish at the rim.
I think people didn’t like JJ because he kept stepping out of bounds.
I think people don’t like Blake because of his defense.
I think people don’t like Trout for all the reasons we keep reading about ad nauseum.
The idea of a designated whipping boy is a popular one around here but I don’t buy it. Outside of vent and vent-like threads, I usually see pretty legitimate reasons for people dissing a player.
Buck Williams for the hall of fame
Link
http://www.blazersedge.com/search?q=dwb&btn=Go
I should have been one cowboy.
by tominhawaii on May 15, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Here's the thing about "shot selection"
If he can make an off-balance fadeaway with the guy right in his face, then it’s not as bad a shot as you think.
Sticking up for Travis Outlaw since 2008.
Just because he makes it at a 35% clip
as opposed to a 25% clip doesn’t make it a good shot. It’s like Kobe scoring 40 in game 2 against the rockets, yeah, he made those shots, but it’s fool’s gold because no one can shoot those shots at a high percentage over time. You never want to take those shots unless you absolutely have to, and Travis takes those shots far more often than as an absolute last resort.
But
if he makes it at a 45% clip you have to start giving it credence. And Travis shot 45% from the field (higher than that if you take out 3 pointers), mostly crazy jumpers. So Kaboomm has a point.
"...we have so many experts who think that you have to play defense, you have to rebound, you have to be a possession coach, you have to execute. I just laugh. Explosive offense is not as intimidating as dominant defense. But it is scary when you don't know how to stop someone." - George Karl, Nuggets coach
One additional strength for Outlaw
He’s been very durable. It’s nice to have a few guys that rarely get hurt on the roster.
yeah, but
saying that is like complimenting a car that starts consistently but doesn’t have reliable brakes.
by musicdaniel on May 14, 2009 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
If Outlaw were truly terrible your analogy would make sense
But he’s been at least an average player… more like a noisy Toyta Tercel than a care without reliable brakes.
I'm sorry, I know I will get some reaction to this, but I am fed up with Travis
I think there are several reasons to trade Travis:
First external forces:
1. How much higher will his trade value be than right now. He has a non-guaranteed reasonable contract at an economic time when teams are hurting and looking for players with good contracts. If we re-sign him to a larger, more years contract, are teams going to be MORE willing to accept an inconsistent player with a larger contract?
2. His stats are marketable and can bring a more consistent player at a much needed role on this team. A banger 4, a veteran, combined with other player on the team…maybe a starting PG.
Next, Internal Forces
1. Consistency is much needed on this team. A team that thrives on efficiencies and squeezing every available point out of every possesion gets constantly killed when an inconsistent guy comes in and throws up bad shots, misses assignments on the defensive end, misses obvious rebounds and gives teams another possesion or doesn’t give us another. It is even more important when he is our 6th man and the first off the bench to replace somebody in foul trouble, add scoring punch etc. Which leads me to..
2. Nate loves and trusts him way too much for as inconsistent as he is. How many times during the year were you sitting there thinking, why is Travis still in, Rudy should be in he was on fire…or put Nic back in he can stop that guy…or man, we need rebounds why is Travis still in there? We have to make Nate depend on our more consistent players and remove the “crutch” of playing Travis big minutes.
3. Lastly, I think Dave said it best about Travis when he said, “we don’t know.” Do Championship teams have guys that play large roles that they don’t know about? Role players are just that, they know their role. I think if you ask 10 people “What is Travis’ role?” you will get 10 different answers (scoring punch, spark off the bench, locker room guy, SF, PF..etc). We need guys to play and know their role around Roy, Oden and Alderidge… and if TiH is right, his role is to be scapegoat, doesn’t that mean we never succeed?
Take away Nate's addiction, trade Travis Outlaw.
I want Kirk Hinrich!!!!!
Even Cleveland lost games this year
Blazers fans need a DWB, I don’t, but many do. It is probably my least favorite Blazers fan trait. Outlaw can take it and he’s used to it. If he is traded, fans will find a new Blazers player to blame for every loss, close game to a crappy team, every turnover, every basket the other team makes, every missed shot by the Blazers, every foul on the Blazers, every bad call by the ref. They are all things that are Outlaws fault after a game.
I don't think...
Nate loves Travis. I think in close games where the only thing that decides who wins is more points, Travis fills that critical role of being a scorer.
People just don’t like the way he scores. 2 dribbles step back jumper. 1 dribble, jab step jumper. three pointer.
Guy is afraid of contact, someone who’s athletic like that should average more than 3 FTA’s per game. 4 rebounds is pretty sad too. I still like Travis and what he did for us. I just want Martell to take his place and Batum to develop. I’d send him off for not much because his value was higher last year than now.
I don't know if he is always 'afraid' of contact
True he does seem to avoid it unless Nate tells him to attack the rim, but he just uses his quick and high jumping ability to shot over most defenders. The excessive use of the fade away obviously irritates everyone, including some outlawfanboys like me. Rudy should be the sixth man, but I don’t hold it against Nate, or Travis for trusting in Travis to hit some big shots in the playoffs, same thing happened with Jason Terry and the Mavs, albeit, his production didn’t decline as much as Travis, but his percentages plummeted in the playoffs (Denver defense should get some credit here) and his shot selection never was that great he just can hit a lot of hard shots like Travis.
Wherever Travis plays, I’d like to seem him improve his Rebounding, FT shooting, passing (at least try it a little more), and team defense (his man to man on PFs is actually not that bad, which the stats Dave mentioned back up what you see when he ’man’s up’ against skilled PFs like Duncan and Dirk), other than that I think he is a very special player (no, not that kind) with an idiosyncratic set of skills that at times can be the most exciting Blazer to watch play live.
"The problem with tweeners is that sometimes they’re exactly what you need to plug the hole and sometimes they are the hole."
-LaughingJon
*terry actually shot a worse % against the spurs
but overall, y’all maybe get my point, that you have trust your sixth man, and some sixth men (can you pluralize sixth man?) unpredictably fade in the post season (uncle cliffy)?
"The problem with tweeners is that sometimes they’re exactly what you need to plug the hole and sometimes they are the hole."
-LaughingJon
I guess I would like a 6th man that is consistent at what he does.
With Terry you know what you’re getting, a streaky shooter that can push runs higher, lift a team that is struggling or spread the floor. Sure his shot might come and go, but his role and his play does not.
What is Travis’ role? Shoot first? Rebound? Defend? Small forward? Power Forward? We don’t know. We know he plays a lot of minutes, but at what, with what and how?
Take away Nate's addiction, trade Travis Outlaw.
I want Kirk Hinrich!!!!!
this seems paradoxical:
With Terry you know what you’re getting, a streaky shooter….
"The problem with tweeners is that sometimes they’re exactly what you need to plug the hole and sometimes they are the hole."
-LaughingJon
I don't think so
Dallas’ coaches know what to do when Terry is hitting….leave him in. They know what to do when he isn’t…take him out. Like House of the Celtics, but to a greater extent, that’s his role.
With Travis, you don’t know. He’ll miss consistently for the game, then make an incredibly tough shot at the shot clock buzzer, and you think…is he on now? you don’t know.
Take away Nate's addiction, trade Travis Outlaw.
I want Kirk Hinrich!!!!!
The funny thing is that despite his seemingly horrible attempts Travis is not inefficient
His FG% is actually better than Rudy’s. And he can create his shots himself (more attempts per minute/game), which I suppose is the main reason Nate plays him a lot in the fourth quarter over a player like Nic or Rudy. Yes, Rudy is a rookie and will likely improve a lot. But while we remember his Triple Triple Triple shots he bricked just as often or missed a defensive assignment last year. Travis should post up and drive more to become better, but what he does is pretty good http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/tiny.cgi?id=OB2p9
I’m not at all against trading Travis if it brings us the right player. I’m against trading Travis for the sake of trading Travis. As stated above, I don’t think Blazers fans would be happier if they had a slightly more productive Luol Deng or Richard Jefferson in his place/starting in front of Nic who commands takes up over twice the salary and has other flaws (in Deng’s case no reliable outside shot, in Jefferson’s case a fading athleticism). And if the Blazers don’t find the right trading partner and decide to keep him I don’t think Travis commands that type of salary even next year. He would get a similar deal to Martell.
"Officiating has to be a science, not an art" - Rick Carlisle
by Norsktroll on May 14, 2009 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
I would never want the Blazers to trade him for trade's sake..
But if the Blazers can remove a log jam at one position and solidify another (PF, PG) why not do that? I mean, be frugal, look for the right piece, but round out the team. Who else are we going to move at the SF? Batum – just as much potential as Travis, younger and better defender. Martell – trade value not anywhere near Outlaw’s.
Take away Nate's addiction, trade Travis Outlaw.
I want Kirk Hinrich!!!!!
I started the year thinking this was Martell's audition year for another team.
I finished it thinking Batum is the guy of the future at the 3 and now we need to remove the log jam. Am I wrong?
Take away Nate's addiction, trade Travis Outlaw.
I want Kirk Hinrich!!!!!
He's peaked.
Send him packing with a lovely farewell card signed by the team.
"Respect everyone, fear no one." -TP
Although travis does a good job in the fourth quarter...
There are three other quarters before the fourth that have a great impact on the game. I thinks Outlaw’s clutchness and shotmaking ability in the fourth quarter merely gets back what he does the entire game in terms of basic basketball plays and blunders. I think trading up in the draft to get a banger back up powerforward and allowing Webster and Batum handle the small forward position would be a good play. But ill let KP make that decision and live with what he does.
"In general, I hate the snap judgments. I hate the rush to predict things. I hate the sports culture that can't think of anything to say unless it is predicting things. I dislike the over-hyping and the following angst-ridden crashes. I dislike the overdrawn, over-simplified, nuance-free generalizations that sprout like weeds over the conversational landscape because accuracy and fairness and truth don't fit as neatly between commercials or quote as easily around the water cooler."
-Dave
Totally agree
I’ve been saying that to my television for two years now
by musicdaniel on May 14, 2009 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions
who would you rather have?
He was picked up late in the first round of one of the deepest drafts in NBA history (2003, LeBron, etc…) Players chosen after him include Kendrick Perkins who’s making a lot of people wet as a serviceable replacement for KG. But a SI peer poll has him as" The player who thinks he’s a lot better than he really is." That would be troublesome on a deep team. Josh Howard does a lot of the same things Travis does, but perhaps in a more mechanical (less hair raising fashion), However, he was more NBA ready, and thus has had 5 + years with 30 + minutes. Now he’s being paid accordingly. In the first round, in hindsight, Boris Diaw may have been the best pick. If for no other reason than Brandon not having to play against him 4 times a year. The three point shooters in the second round (Kapono, Jones, and Korver) don’t interest me because they’re one dimensional.
As far as trade speculation. The players we hear mentioned generally fall under one or more of these categories: unobtainable, lateral, or more expensive
Finally in regards to his IQ, basketball or otherwise. This is less of a topic on here, but I hear it constantly at bars when watching the games. When did fans start expecting Rhodes Scholar athletes? The man went to high school in Mississippi. The poorest state in the country. We have issues in our own school system and a considerable amount of resources. If you need someone to blame, who doesn’t, look to the Blazers organization. Using him as a stop gap answer to two positions and relying on him to be the only 1 on 1 scorer in the 2nd unit? A lot of “reps” in practice doesn’t equate to game speed for a burgeoning player. We’ll be able to sign him to an extended contract at a reasonable price and have to live with knowing his shot makes us scared.
Personally, I’m thankful to have him and want two more playoff series minimum. Also, I enjoy the fear he instills in our fans.
wanderlust
Does anyone remember Uncle Cliffy????
Travis = Uncle Cliffy
Good regular season, horrible playoffs
enough said
As shown consistently
over the last dozen one playoff series. Not enough of a sample size to make that strong of a statement.
"...we have so many experts who think that you have to play defense, you have to rebound, you have to be a possession coach, you have to execute. I just laugh. Explosive offense is not as intimidating as dominant defense. But it is scary when you don't know how to stop someone." - George Karl, Nuggets coach
You know there is a creepy syncrhonicity here.
From what I have seen on the blogs and newspapers that cover the L@kers, the fans there are having EXACTLY the same kind of schizophrenic love/hate/cheer/fear relationship with ANOTHER brilliantly inconsistent small forward, Lamar Odom.
Are there any takeaways we can draw from that relationship?
yeah, you can't win a championship with em....
Take away Nate's addiction, trade Travis Outlaw.
I want Kirk Hinrich!!!!!
Here's something I just thought about (then back to work)
Let’s say 3 years from now the Blazers win the Championship in game 7 against the Cleveland Cavs in Portland in front of a rabid Rose Garden Fanbase…
Is Travis standing on the Podium in a Blazers’ uniform? What was his role in getting us there? Can you even picture him on the team that helps us achieve that?
Take away Nate's addiction, trade Travis Outlaw.
I want Kirk Hinrich!!!!!
NATE'S NOT DEVELOPING TRAVIS ENOUGH. FIRE NATE!!!!
Just kidding. I say trade him for a backup at the 4. See if Martell comes back, keep Batum at all costs.
And bring back Ime Udoka for insurance purposes. He’s a free agent and I was disappointed he didn’t get re-signed.
Ime wants to play,not going to happen here.
If he would be happy on the end of the bench great I like him but I don’t see it.
I like Travis
I think he still has some untapped potential but I don’t know how long it’s going to take to reach it.
I’d say let him prove himself next season
Blazers win!
This was his first playoff year..guys
its really tough whether or not to trade travis but I think we should still wait for this year and see what he can bring now that he has the experience what its like in the playoffs. It was everyones first year so everyone will react somewhat different, as far for brandon roy and all superstars you know how they will act but.. anyway Travis has saved us so much during the regular season gotta remeber that Detroit game winning shot and people still whinning about that shot not looking great LOOK! he made it. I say keep Travis Period maybe move him into the back up permanent power forward position dunno.. but keep him period
by Viclubsmau4eva on May 14, 2009 11:20 AM PDT reply actions
Travis is a decent asset and a good price that has to be used the right way
If he doesn’t get moved this offseason, I hope he plays fewer minutes and is used primarily when we are trailing and need an offensive spark.
by jksnake99 on May 14, 2009 11:20 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
travis
i watched travis his first two years in summer league in salt lake city. he is light years beyond what he was. he progresses/developes very slowly but still has ability to improve over next several years. May bring in someone else to provide what people think he lacks but there is no guarantee that it will be better either on the court or especially with the team off the court. in final, give him time and tinker else where.
by aggie on May 14, 2009 11:43 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
I <3 Travis. He stays.
But, he moves into the back-up power foward role, with either Webster or Batum being the SF off the bench. I love Travis and thinks that he is a perfect 6th man for our team. He obviously is better as a PF. As much as I would trade away Webster and Outlaw for Tayshaun, it ain’t happening. And getting rid of Travis seems dumb for anyone else.
"We believe" -Rudy Fernandez
I never really thought about that
Out of everyone on the roster that has a realist chance of staying, Outlaw would probably be the most accepting of lesser minutes. He would hate it and be mad, but he is smart enough to know why someone else is in the game instead of him. Rudy understood why Outlaw was in game instead of him. He would deal with it and then ask KP to trade him at the season’s end.
I think his next round in the playoffs he’ll be way better than he was this year. I’m not sure where he’s going, and only God knows where he’s been. He’s a tough shot lover, an Outlaw on the wing.
I understand that Travis is able to somewhat create his own shot.
What I don’t understand, is why that is so great when just about every time the shot he “created” is a jump shot. It’s always two dribbles pull up for a long contested jump shot.
I realize this is probably one of the main complaints about him -his shot selection. He doesn’t use his ability to create to get him to the basket for an easier, higher percentage shot or to get him to the foul line.
So that is my question, how/why can we value him being able to create his own shot, when that shot is almost never a great shot? In my opinion, unless a player gets a good shot that is high percentage, the skill to get your own shot is not that useful.
That is a big deal, but . . .
As Dave and others noted — if he combined that with a pass option, he’d be twice as good.
Sticking up for Travis Outlaw since 2008.
Everybody agree's Good Guy
Problem is the time is going to dry up. Most I talk to agree we need banger backup PF,now with Martell back and Batum improving where will time come. Trade him for his own good and get that banger.
Time
C-Oden,Joel,LA PF-LA,new banger,Freeland SF-Batum,Webster,Roy SG-Roy,Rudy,Bayless PG-?,Bayless,Roy Anymore time comes from injury.Hope we dont have many. GoBlazers! Sorry Blake another good guy that won’t fit.
I want to see stats on Outlaws off-balance shooting % and set-up percentage
I’ll bet he shoots like 80% on contested leaning jumpers and 25% on wide open shots.
Maybe it's like the Steeler's QB
Where when he gets touched by the opposing team his percentages go waaaaaaay up
Blazers win!
Outlaw regular season vs Outlaw post season
One hard playoff foul was all it took to keep Outlaw away from the rim. That’s it! One foul and all he did has shoot 20 ft fade aways.
2-4 the who
Thanks Dave
for an even-handed look at Travis Outlaw. Those are hard to come by around these parts. – Elgin
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
Value for dollar
I like Travis and I think on a value per dollar basis he looks a lot better than than what we’d get for him on the open market. Unless we can package him for a significant upgrade at PG, I’d keep him.
“Keep him” doesn’t mean that we use him the same way — I’d see significantly fewer minutes for him (Rudy getting the lion’s share of 6th man minutes, and Martell getting most of the SF minutes). I’m not convinced we’re going to get this miracle banger PF who is going to be super productive for the 10 minutes LaMarcus doesn’t play PF, so Travis could play more PF. (Even though Travis may be the opposite of a “banger” PF, I think he can better use his athleticism to rebound, defend and score at PF better than at the 3.)
It will be interesting to see who runs the second unit. Travis benefits if he can just play and not think too much, so if we have a PG that can direct play, Travis’s poor decision making may come into play less.
While there are those who think we just need to “tweak” the lineup that won 54 games, I think there will be significant changes with Martell returning, Rudy playing major 6th man minutes, Greg developing some offense, and the possible change/upgrade at PG. We’ll probably have at least 5 new players out of the 15 player roster, so change is afoot.
Travis brings some positives to the floor, but his role(s) will change next year if he’s here. If not, I hope we get good value for him.
Outlaw
Can we get a mid-late first for him? Then, send that in a package IF the player from the team(not pointing out any certain person) does not want/need Travis/ instead they could use two firsts more?
Offseason:
Trade For Mike Conley Jr
Sign Antonio McDyess & Othello Hunter
Draft Kevin Seraphin/Edwin Jackson(Eurostash)
Key question about Outlaw
Did he underachieve in the playoffs because of his own play or because he was well defended by Battier and the Rockets just happened to be his worst-case opponent? That would be worth analyzing.
Sticking up for Travis Outlaw since 2008.
To me, this is the issue with Travis:
How good is Travis? We don’t know.
How good will Travis become? How much room does he have to grow yet? We don’t know.
How clearly will his strengths tell as our full-time, back-up power forward and how effectively can we compensate for his weaknesses? We don’t know.
How much can we rely on him to perform at a top level every night? We don’t know.
How long will it take us to find out the answers to these questions? We don’t know.
A good player is a player who can give you flashes. They are inconsistent and have holes in their game. A great player, a foundational player, a player to hold onto, is someone who gives you real contributions night in and night out. They are at least serviceable in all aspects in the game, although they may have definite strengths and weaknesses.
The issue with Travis is that he is the first kind of player, and he shows no signs of becoming the second.
PUT BATUM IN NOW: Rallying cry of the BBIQ appreciation club
Just keep swimming, just keep swimming...
We do know
he won’t be adding any weight, its been the same since he was drafted :\
Offseason:
Trade For Mike Conley Jr
Sign Antonio McDyess & Othello Hunter
Draft Kevin Seraphin/Edwin Jackson(Eurostash)
by TheGreatDane17 on May 16, 2009 9:18 PM PDT up reply actions
SEVEN YEARS!!!
Way too long to still be asking the question what do we have, maybe next year, this is his first time. This is also this third contract. I can’t believe that everyones logic is so blinded. Travis is a huck and chuck shooter. There are times even a blind mouse finds cheese. That is Travis. The facts are next year he is the third choice at his position. Nic, Martell, last and least Outlaw. Stop over thinking this issue. Would you trade the third guy in a position with others for a starter… YES! As to he is Brandon’s BFF. Why don’t we have Nate Robinson and Jamal Crawford? They grew up with him too. And lets get ride of Nate and hire that University of Washington coach. Brandon is paid money to play basketball with whoever KP puts on the floor with him. Brandon is not Rasheed or Bonzi. Brandon is a class act. Bottom line, they are professionals. This is a business. If you paid someone $4,000,000.00 or so a year to play basketball for seven years, you should know what you are getting. What should we be getting…. SOMEONE ELSE!
Bring back Franz Bread Cards!
> I can’t believe that everyones logic is so blinded.
24 years old, man.
> The facts are next year he is the third choice at his position. Nic, Martell, last and least Outlaw. Stop over thinking this issue.
Let’s underthink it – that would be the alternative. – Elgin
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
How long are you willing to wait?
If someone had said it would take six or seven seasons we all would pass
Bring back Franz Bread Cards!
He continues to be 24 years old
He made a poor decision signing with the Blazers when he was 18 just to gather splinters for three years. Finally, after a change of front office personnel, he began to get some coaching at the age of 20/21. Now he’s 24. Maybe next year is the decision point, instead of last year.
It’s not my call to make, neither is it yours. – Elgin
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
my take on Travis
Travis’ value to the team is considerably more then any of his stats can illuminate. He is a high character guy who brings a cohesive synergry to his teammates. He is well liked. His humble nature reflects similarly off the court as on. As many times as Travis takes those jab-step J’s, he’s never considered a cast off. His teammates give him the ball because they have confidence in him.
Has the chemistry factor already left the minds of rabid blazermaniacs after one taste of playoff nectar? It wasn’t that long ago that the Portland Trail Blazers where a frankenstien of a team; parts acquired without regard for personality, just talent (or perceived talent) and sewn together. The brains of Trader Bob leading the armed raised monster roaming around the NBA. Remember how that ended? I mean the movie. Remember how that Trail Blazer era ended. Anyone suggest the endings being identical is coincidence, do step up.
What I’m saying is like Travis game or not, he DOES bring an element that no statistic can capture, and that no win-it-all-now-now-now-fan mentality can appreciate. That element is the respect of his teammates and coaches.
A suggestion for the fans who continue to bring up the trade this guy or that for this guy or that in hopes some fanstasy tweak will somehow bring the title back to P-town, go bake yourselves some chocolate chip cookies but get them hot out of the oven. Cause once they cool off they’re just dog biscuits.
I AM A PORTLAND TRAIL BLAZERS SUPPORTER.
I think Outlaw’s scoring off the bench is an overrated quality. And, I think his defense + rebounding + lack of passing wipe out most of the positive contributions that he makes.
Blazers wings next season — I’d like to see Brandon, Martell, Batum and Rudy getting the minutes on the wing. I think both Rudy and Batum are better prospects. Roy is Roy. And I prefer Martell’s game over Outlaw’s because of his defense.
He’s a solid player but I’m not wild about the fit, I think other players already on the team offer more. At this stage, I consider Outlaw trade bait.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
