Travis Outlaw - JQ's Behind the Locker room
by ratbastird on Sep 29, 2009 11:07 AM PDT
429 comments
First off, I think this was a great article and read.
Below I've taking quotes and made comments. In part I'm commenting because Travis feels fans hate him. I won't back down from statements I've made, but I do want Travis to know that I don't believe fans hate him at all. Anyway, it was a cool article and one people should check out.
And people have long assumed that Outlaw wasn’t very smart, perhaps because of his country drawl, perhaps because of his anxiety around large groups of media, or because he never attended college. He would admit that books and school were never his forte, but at the same time, Outlaw is one of the wisest guys on the team. He has an incredible ability to assess a situation and break it down to the simplest and most logical of terms.
I keep hearing that people don't think Travis is smart. (Which is different than the BBIQ) I was hoping someone could link me to that because I have yet to read that myself. I just keep reading this and it irks me because... well... I haven't read that anywhere of anyone actually saying it but I hear people talking about this rumor of it being said. I think it's more rumor than actual fact. I really don't think it's been said anywhere, but if it has, please link it so I can mentally whip the person who said it.
Frankly I think he's a cool and wise guy. I have no idea about his intelligence because I just don't know him, but I do see signs that he has some good wisdom about him and every article I ever read, when he comes down from being brash, seems to show this as well. (not that brash is bad, sometimes you need that and it can be used. I honestly like that at times when it's the player representing the team and showcasing that they have confidence and pride in what they're doing.)
I loved that Travis said this:
This is the last year in his contract, and after his earlier tweet, I expected him to be statistically motivated. But when I asked him if he felt he needed to have a big year to get a good contract, he surprised me with his answer.
“I feel like everybody wants somebody off a winning team, that’s the way I look at it,’’ Outlaw said.
He talked about putting his work in this summer, an area that has been lacking in his previous six seasons. I asked where he felt he improved.
“I would have to say and I hate to use the word, because I don’t believe in it, but basketball IQ. But just my whole aspect of looking at the game. I used to look at it as scoring mentality. But now it’s like I look at it as, what's my advantage? I mean, I know I can get my shot off against anyone, but now it’s kind of like, we know you can get your shot off, but can you get in the lane, create for others, or can you score when the team needs it?’’
I think a lot of what he says gets blown up(referring to Quick's interview last year about scoring and then the twitter). They're stars playing at an elite level and yet they're also young guys having fun. Who HASNT bragged about something in regards to sports. You're talking smack and letting it out because you feel proud in what you do. We all do it, but when a star does it, people go stupid nuts.
Part of that is people may also feel nervous. The team we have is incredible, so what's going to go wrong? I think some of us, and i"m likely guilty too, are looking for something bad because we can't believe how good things are going.
Either way, I love what Travis said here. He still seems focused on offense and I think he could be a defensive juggernaut if he put his mind to it, but it shows an overall desire to do what it takes to win for and with the team. I admit I'm a person that was a little concerned that he'd be more focused on himself (although I think I mostly brushed it off, just raised the eyebrow), and this puts me completely at ease and tells me that he's having fun talking smack, but in the end, he totally gets it. Frankly, it makes me like him more and I don't think I'll be worrying about brash comments in the future.
Travis also talked about the lack of fan love.
“I read the blog, and I saw some of it,’’ he said almost sheepishly. “I wanted to write back on it, but I said some things don’t deserve a response. Everybody has their opinion, and me sitting and arguing about it ain’t gonna solve it.’’
It’s one of the reasons why Outlaw contends that he is one of the most hated Blazers and likely to be traded. He says he is “fine” with Portland (“heck, been here six years, it’s like a second home”) but at the same time he claims he has never been embraced.
I don't think ANY blazer fan hates Travis. I could be wrong, but I really don't think this is the case. I suspect that of all the guys on the blazers, he's probably the one who's coolest to hang out with.
I think what this is about is that fans see someone who can be absolutely amazing in Travis. He can score almost at will, his length and athleticism make him a potential match up nightmare. What I see is someone who can be a star. I also see someone that isn't always in the right spot or isn't always doing what I believe is the best decision. I do NOT hate Travis. I love the guy, but as a basketball player I also feel frustrated because I believe he can be so much more. If Udoka came in and did what Outlaw does, I think people would be excited because it all comes down to expectations. We don't expect Udoka to do anything at this point, but a lot of us expect the world of Outlaw. It's stupid, but it's what people do at times.
My end conclusion on Travis is that we, as fans, never know the whole story. Maybe Nate sends him out there with a "don't worry about anything except scoring." The players are asked to fill roles and I trust this coaching staff and management to make the smart decisions with roles and position. They know what they want from the players and what the players can do and Travis's minutes showcase the fact that he gave the team what they wanted. The fact we won 54 games showcases the fact that the team was right about what they wanted. The fact he hit game winner after game winner showed that he gets the job done.
If Travis is reading this, just remember that Fan's are idiots (yes that includes me). We love being being backseat coaches because we love our team and we love the game. There was a time where I believe the fan base was smarter than management, but that time has long passed. Now the fans are idiots and the only people Travis should be concerned about is the coaching staff and what THEY tell him he should be doing. 54 wins say they know better than the fans.
We do have a log Jam at SF. I don't know who'll win out and who'll be traded, but honestly, if outlaw is about winning and team and wants to be here, I will happy to have him. If he does leave, you better believe I'll be clapping for him when he's introduced.
On a side note... holy crud this seems to have become more complicated to post since last i did it!!!
11 recs |
429 comments
Email
Print
Comments
50+ years of NBA history
Part of that is people may also feel nervous. The team we have is incredible, so what’s going to go wrong? I think some of us, and i"m likely guilty too, are looking for something bad because we can’t believe how good things are going.
It’s difficult to keep too many young players happy when their PT is limited. Nate is way out in “front” of this by saying that complainnig about roles won’t be tolerated. Still, human nature says it’s hard to put young egos aside and embrace a common goal, and the player’s agents tend to get involved in these debates about who’s playing and how much
Hopefully “everyone” will keep quiet and be content with whatever minutes they’re given, but (if I was a betting man) I wouldn’t handicap it that way
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 29, 2009 11:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah. We have already seen that if a player complains,
Then he gets traded to Sacramento.
I get the paper, so I don't care!
by Name's Ash on Sep 29, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
To be third string PG no less!
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Sep 30, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see what you are saying
but so far, all the players are saying “the right thing”. Check the Blake quote at the very end of this same article. – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 29, 2009 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've definitely seen and heard people straight up say that Outlaw is stupid.
Especially on radio shows. It was happening here a lot too, until people pointed out that talking in a southern drawl doesn’t mean that you’re stupid. These people actually listened to what he was saying, and have reformatted their views towards Travis’ BBIQ. And people will always see what they want to if they look hard enough.
There are definitely people on here who I would say literally dislike Travis as a basketball player. Do not appreciate what he brings to this team, and believe that he is a cancer, where it would be better for us to give him away (ala Randolph) than keep him.
I agree, and have been pushing the idea, that people’s expectations create a lot of their problems with Outlaw. They think that he is a worse player than he is because of their expectations for him. Players that do not have high expectations, are generally considered better than Travis (by a lot of these people) because of the positive experience they have when that player is competent.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Sep 29, 2009 12:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well
Ultimately my response here is, “well… they’re stupid.”
I’m not local at the moment so most of what I read is BE or Olive and the other links. I’ve boycotted Canzano.
Travis can be up and down, but ultimately he’s a boon for the team and calling him a cancer… that’s just out of line and rather uneducated as a blazer fan.
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
by ratbastird on Sep 29, 2009 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
And have gotten into several arguments that have resulted in my comments being deleted, which honestly is probably for the better.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Sep 29, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am on the trade Outlaw wagon
Do i hate him? Heck no , I have enjoyed Travis. Travis has come a long way from Starkville. I have been however on the trade TO wagon. I also think we will eventually have to trade Rudy. I am a fan of both player’s & will root for them where ever they end up (except against Portland) I just feel that at some point there will not be enough minutes for this many talented players. We have been there & done that, it did not work. KP has to make some hard decisions, who is the best fit? What is the best way to consolidate & stay at an elite level? I may be wrong but these are the players as much as i like them that i feel we can trade for a solid big that can complete what others on this site have called roster balance. I agree with this in that with a salary cap you can indeed be to deep, you need role players & stars. The time is coming soon when the hard decisions have to be made.
"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-
by We-B-Dunkin on Sep 29, 2009 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My question is why not wait until their play dictates a change?
This year does not need a change. If Travis walks for nothing at the end of the year and we have won a championship I am very happy. If Travis is so valuable that we cannot afford to lose him, the Blazers can pay him. It is not Travis or Rudy or Martell or Nic right now. It is team and togetherness.
Last year my hopes were on Sergio and Channing becoming solid for us. It did not work out and they are gone. But they did help us win 54 games. We did maintain a superb team chemistry (by all accounts). We can make trades at the draft next year if someone wants Travis then (and wants to jump ahead of the FA deep pocket crowd). He is our best weapon off the bench returning from last year. He says he is committing to defense this year. Lets watch and see what he does and enjoy the ride.
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Sep 30, 2009 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True to a point, but if a good trade comes up we better pounce...like say Outlaw, frye, and Jack for Devin Harris. Whoops.
by dario argento on Sep 30, 2009 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We have no evidence that was ever an option
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 11:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is not possible it was an option
I can’t believe that rumor doesn’t die… we were not getting Devin Harris for bench pieces, and NJ did not prefer bench pieces over Devin Harris.
It wasn’t going to happen. It is silly.
M—
by Mortimer on Oct 1, 2009 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, anything is possible
LA got Pau for bench pieces, after all.
But the likelihood it was an option is probably less than 0.1%.
Which team that was a party to that is going to let people know? Will NJ say, “Oh, yeah, we didn’t really want Harris, but Portland wouldn’t take him?” Will Portland say, “We could have had Harris, but didn’t want him?” Why would they do that?
Somebody chose to leak something for their own purposes, and that person can never be trusted to tell the whole story.
Didn’t Harris have a poison pill that made that deal impossible anyway?
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it would have been 'possible', salary wise
If we send Trout and Raef and whoever to NJ, they send Kidd to the Mavs, and we get Harris.
But then, the point is, why would NJ lose Jason Kidd and not get back the best player in the whole deal? Thorn isn’t the Chris Wallace, he’s a sharp customer.
And the Mavs wouldn’t trade Harris to us for bench pieces since their point was to get Jason Kidd. We likely tried to be a part of it, but neither team had any reason to include us when the Nets wanted to get as much as they could for Kidd and the Mavs just wanted Kidd. Any scenario for the Nets that doesn’t end with them getting Devin Harris is not a plausible scenario.
I think it could have worked, salary wise. Something like Jack, Trout, Raef, etc.
M—
by Mortimer on Oct 1, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You may be right about the salaries
I never worked it out because I didn’t see it happening anyway.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, the salaries thing is the least of that rumor's problems
It doesn’t pass any sort of common sense test, and doesn’t involve any idiotic GMs.
It just wasn’t a real scenario, but people keep repeating it like we turned it down. It’s weird.
M—
by Mortimer on Oct 1, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
people keep repeating it like we turned it down. It’s weird.
That’s how it was reported by Kenny and Dwight. You can email them for clarification, if you want
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hahaha
Well, if the esteemed Kenny Vance and grumpy ol’ Dwight said it, despite it being extremely unrealistic and not a chance in hell of happening, it must have been a real possibility.
;-) (WINK)
Morty
by Mortimer on Oct 1, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe we tried to get in on it
And I believe neither team had any reason to just give us Devin Harris for scraps. Makes no sense amongst smat GMs.
Reporters don’t know what they’re talking about with rumors most of the time. Bucher, who has MANY more contacts than Vance and Dwight combined, said we were gonna do Przy for Sam Cassell. That makes no sense, and was obviously not a real rumor.
If it makes no sense, and no one is a living joke that gets to decide these things, it isn’t real.
M—
by Mortimer on Oct 1, 2009 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And reporters will always just say
“This was how it was described to me by my sources”.
They don’t then go “yeah, that was dumb, but I didn’t know any better because I don’t actually know a lot of players and their individual worth around the league”.
M—
by Mortimer on Oct 1, 2009 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Their source is Wojnarowski
And in that case, he was wrong. As a Mavs fan, the talks were always Kidd comes to Dallas, Harris comes to New Jersey. KP might have been in it as a facilitator after The George and The Stackhouse killed the first two versions of the deal, but he really would have had to bowl over the Nets with his offer to grab Harris out of their cold hands. Remember, at that time the Nets still had Carter AND Jefferson. No need for another athletic swingman with Outlaw.
"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard
by Norsktroll on Oct 1, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wojnarowski was wrong on something????
NO!!!!
I’ve lost all faith in humanity.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 2, 2009 1:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
we have independent soources
We have no evidence that was ever an option
Jaynes and Vance have both reported this rumor, and they have long-term contacts, from around the NBA
(doesn’t mean the offer was out there, doesn’t mean it wasn’t, either)
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We have evidence it was a rumor
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow! Didn't mean to stoke the fires there. I was only half serious. I also think it's unlikely that deal was truly on the table, but it could have been.
Hindsight is 20/20 with those 3 players, and that trade appears laughable today, but if I remember correctly that trade rumor was during the 13 game win streak when those guys were playing real quality ball, and all were young with good potential, and cheap. So it’s not out of the question. Also that was before Harris was a bona-fide all-star. If I remember correctly he was injured at the time as well.
by dario argento on Oct 1, 2009 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a rumor that keeps popping up and a few of us here keep trying to squash it
Because it is so unreasonable.
Harris was already a star young PG before the trade, he just exploded with the Nets because he wasn’t a 4th option anymore. But he was already very well known and highly regarded.
It was laughable back then too, and only possible if the Nets GM was a boner-head. Which he isn’t, he’s a sharp cookie (I don’t know why that means someone is smart; I like soft chewy cookies).
The Mavs wanted Kidd, the Nets wanted the Mavs good young PG, the Blazers never had a chance to get him no matter how much we wanted him. It would have taken losing LMA even back then, and especially now.
I love Devin Harris, he was my favorite non-star PG back then and I wish he could be a Blazer. He’d fit almost perfectly.
Morty
by Mortimer on Oct 2, 2009 1:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
in regards to the idiom
I have always heard “smart cookie” not “sharp cookie”.
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
by austinpwnz on Oct 2, 2009 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Both teams played hard.
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
by austinpwnz on Oct 2, 2009 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
he’s a sharp cookie (I don’t know why that means someone is smart;
There’s a great book about these idioms that everybody says, but nobody remembers why…it’s called “Why you say it”
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 2, 2009 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Forget radio--who here @ BE has said Trout is dumb?
I haven’t seen it. I’m among those who have questioned his BB IQ, but that is NOT the same thing. You can be a PhD and lack hoops smarts. A number of us have made that point.
And the claim that Trout is stereotyped because of his southern drawl is similarly bogus. Jerry West has a drawl; do folks jump to the conclusion that he’s dumb? Come on.
What made me sad in the Quick piece is Outlaw’s statement that Portland fans don’t love him. Fact is, BB IQ or no, Trout is one of the MOST beloved Blazers. Even fans like myself, who have called for Outlaw to be traded, can’t help loving him. He’s so obviously a good guy.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Sep 29, 2009 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep,Duh
"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-
by We-B-Dunkin on Sep 29, 2009 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its the truth though.
Travis Outlaw is a stupid dude
-RipCity (actually just search RipCity ’s account for the terms idiot , idiot, or idiot
And I’m sure Travis is referencing comments that forced this fanpost Travis and BBIQ
with even in it contains gems like :
Travis HAS NO BASKETBALL IQ, that’s the problem
Every now and then he gets lucky, but he’s dumb as a rock. Sorry Travis, you’re dumb.
-Leeroy Jenkins
Outlaw tries, he’s just stupid.
Outlaw heard me call him an idiot
-Ratbastird (both)
Outlaw = dumb
-The Tin Foil
A nice little thread of people making fun of Outlaw’s intelligence
Yea people in glass houses shouldn’t have a searchable index.
BE has definitely not been the worst of it, but turning a blind eye to this, and saying that J. Quick is trying to stir up nothing, and that Travis can’t be talking about our site, is wrong. Some of these are probably talking about decisions but saying all this junk about a guy can’t make him exactly happy, nor make him think that people in Portland love him here.
And this is just (a small sample even of the) people who have literally said Outlaw is dumb etc. This does not even come close to the bigger more popular phrase "Outlaw has no/ very little/ a chipmunk’s amount of BBIQ.
Or the even more popular we need to trade Travis for a 2nd round draft pick, if we trade travis we can move up in the draft, get rid of Travis so X can develop. We’ve got too many good players we need to get rid of one of them… How about Travis. People get at this from whatever angle they want to, and Travis being not exactly impressed with all of this junk is not exactly a surprise.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Sep 29, 2009 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions 10 recs
Ouch. Ann pwned me for that one.
Gameday threads should not be used for these purposes. I’m pretty sure within each gameday thread you could find most any player being maligned for something based on an individual play. Like “ODEN!! LEARN TO DRIBBLE!!!” Surely, Greg knows how to dribble. But in the gameday threads, emotion is king.
Whatever
thetinfoil@gmail.com
by TheTinfoil on Sep 29, 2009 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good point
I don’t do the Gameday thread thing (I’m downstairs watching on theHDTV, not upstairs at my computer). So I’d missed a lot of the venom sent Trout’s way. I was thinking in terms of fanposts. In those, people have time to weigh their words before typing.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Sep 30, 2009 12:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the proof, Odenator. I think.
Actually, I’m disappointed that I saw some names there that I wish I hadn’t. I’d like to see any of those guys do what Travis does but, of course, we know they’d fail miserably because along with low BBIQ and no athleticism they have poor social skills and low self esteem which probably accounts for them thinking they’re entitled to try to bring others down to their level. Especially when they’re victim is not there to defend themselves. Now I’m getting mad. Damn it. I’ve already decided that, in the future, I’m going to flag every comment I see like that.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 29, 2009 7:36 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I imagine you´re even pretier when you get angry in the heat of the moment.
Probably my latin blood ;)
And I love Travis too.
If the mountain come to you, run. It´s a landslide.
by amlmart1 on Sep 29, 2009 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you, Alfredo. <3
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 29, 2009 10:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey!!!
She’s one of MY cortege. Take your smooth Latin moves somewhere else.
You and Rudy, taking all the women. You Spaniards are all the same.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 5:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't exile me Excellency, but The Latin Lothario is soooooo alluring!!!!!!!!!!!
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, great
You’re even giving him alliteration now. We’re done.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
NOOOOOOOOO! I repent my Regal Regent!!!!!!!!!!!
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All is forgiven
I saw your comment below.
We world dictators can be rather fickle.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My relief is rampant, Oh Regal Rex!
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can tell
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 11:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anne - don't forget
Poor social skills, low self esteem…
…small pee-pee.
(I kid, I kid)
by DonkeyShins on Sep 30, 2009 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No you didn't!
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good job, Odenator: I stand corrected
Clearly we’ve got some jerks here at BE as well. But don’t let it get you down, Travis. With haters, you gotta “consider the source.” Those folks aren’t to be taken seriously.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Sep 30, 2009 12:51 AM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
Rec
Totally agree
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Sep 30, 2009 8:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the sentiment but is calling them jerks extending the problem?
Rather than calling them jerks perhaps we can say their comments rise to jerkiness?
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Sep 30, 2009 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah, I'm a jerk sometimes.
Nevertheless, I aptly qualified my statements about Travis Outlaw’s perceived intelligence.
“Y’know, I’m in the same boat. I’m just a guy of average intelligence who’d have trouble remembering all the plays and knowing what to do out there all of the time. A part of that negative quality trait is due to laziness, but either way my ragging on Travis Outlaw isn’t a personal shot at him—especially when I sort of suffer from similar flaws.”
http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/4/22/849169/wednesday-practice-report-games#14580568
I still came off better in that thread than timg56, who did use the bigoted slur “un-Christian” as a shot at me. Then again, I’m an irreligious person who takes pride in being castigated with that meaningless pejorative.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Sep 30, 2009 11:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is un-Christian a bigoted slur?
In any event, he was specifically addressing behavior when he said that. For a non-Christian, the statement is indeed meaningless, but not for a Christian. For a Christian, it means shape up, dude, you’re out of line. I would think a non-Christian would shrug and say, “Well, I’m not one, so no surprise.”
Anyway, I saw your disclaimer there, and it was a good one. It would probably be better to include such disclaimers in the actual comment, but that’s easier to say after the fact than in the heat of the moment.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, timg56 calling me "un-Christian" is no different than myself writing that ...
someone is a religious wingnut — regardless of whether they’re Christian, Jewish, Muslim, et cetera — so I’m the last person who should call a person out for using a really lame, trifling epithet. Hypocrisy, thy name is AK1984.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 1, 2009 12:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, well, you've done worse
Haven’t we all?
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I've undoubtedly done worse.
http://www.sonicscentral.com/bboard/viewtopic.php?p=5855&sid=7086bc7b76ecafe10319fc7c312a3389
I could’ve used screwed and cheap instead of “jewed” and “niggardly” when referencing Howard Schultz, although I decidedly didn’t do it. Hell, I mirrored Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL) loutish, albeit amusing tirade regarding health care.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 1, 2009 1:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow. Just wow.
It’s an almost speechless kind of wow. I agree 100% with the comment that followed yours.
by Corvid on Oct 1, 2009 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We can't all be fans.
Besides, it’d be boring if everyone liked my style. That’s no fun in any way, shape, or form.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 2, 2009 12:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Niggardly" isn't an epithet
but why you didn’t get banned for that comment from any forum, I don’t know.
slight in amount, quality or effort
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=53659&dict=CALD
–adjective
1. reluctant to give or spend; stingy; miserly.
2. meanly or ungenerously small or scanty: a niggardly tip to a waiter.
–adverb
3. in the manner of a niggard.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/niggardly
Since the above references “niggard”
–noun
1. an excessively parsimonious, miserly, or stingy person.
–adjective
2. niggardly; miserly; stingy.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/niggard?db=luna
But if you thought it was racist to use it, you should have been banned for doing so, IMO. And since you used it in conjunction with a racist/anti-Semitic epithet, you should have been banned twice.
But then, it was a Sonics forum. Maybe we shouldn’t expect too much from them. Perhaps they didn’t know what you meant, or something.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah it makes it much worse
Niggardly isn’t a racist word, it is something else entirely, but using it because you THOUGHT it was a racist word just makes it so much worse.
Man, AK… you don’t HAVE to link that sort of stuff to us, you know! We never woulda’ found it.
But AK be AK, yo.
Morty
by Mortimer on Oct 1, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One of Bedge's undeniable truths
But AK be AK, yo.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As I replyed to "jscot," you can tell that I knew the definition ...
of the term “niggardly” by the context I used it to describe Howard Schutlz’s miserly behavior when dissolving the Basketball Club of Seattle, LLC by selling the Seattle SuperSonics to out-of-town carpetbaggers in the Professional Basketball Club, LLC.
At that time, the goal was to pair “niggardly” with an actual ethnic slur (i.e., “jewed”) — which, by the way, was an appropriate term to describe Schultz’s vile actions, and he could always call me a godless heathen if he wanted to even the score — because the two words were similar in definition and, moreover, such terms added an extra punch paired with each other.
On the topic of derogatory terms, I’m someone who believes that actions speak louder than words. I could call Schultz any word in the dictionary, but nothing I could speak or write would be worse than what he did by being a traitorous traitorous sellout.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 1, 2009 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I figured you knew what it mean
BUT perhaps mistakenly thought it also had racial connotations.
Like, you knew it meant cheap, but was also derived from the N-word.
Ya kno’, bro’?
M—
by Mortimer on Oct 1, 2009 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, it was a convoluted use of highly charged words.
Even at the time, though, I qualfied my vulgar cheap shot with this as the final paragraph to that post: “Okay, I’m done with that gimmicky shtick. It’s back to the basics for me.”
Basically, I was in a angry mood then at Howard Schultz. As a result, I let that anger get the best of me and, in turn, the exaggerated, over-the-top version of myself took hold for a brief minute. Regardless, words that illicit a heated emotional response are great for emphasizing a point.
Anyway, I usually manage to keep my frustration in check with self-restraint and it doesn’t boil over. It didn’t happen that way then, though.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 1, 2009 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Howard Schultz deserves every insult in the book
But no reason to bring poor Jewish people into it! No Jew deserves to be called a Howard Schultz, and to call Howard Schultz a Jew is mean to Jews.
But, you know that already.
Next time, call Schultz a Nazi rapist pedophile. Those are highly charged words we can all enjoy.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Oct 2, 2009 1:12 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Also, AK might want to check the origins of that stereotype re/ Jews
As I understand it, WAY back in the day (in Europe), Jews were barred from most business endeavors. But, unlike Gentiles (non-Jews), they weren’t restricted by religion from money-lending (“usury”). And economic growth required SOME source of capital (money lending).
So understandably, Jews took their opening and ran with it. (Kinda like how Native Americans have taken advantage of the legal loophole that allows them to run casinos.)
Also understandably: Gentiles who couldn’t keep up with their payments resented the money lenders and called ‘em gougers. (No doubt some were, but that’s not really the issue.) The stereotype stuck. But in my experience, there’s not much validity to it. Like the stereotype about blacks being lazy, the claim that Jews are cheap is a falsehood with roots in history.
OK, I hope I haven’t made the controversy worse. Really, Mortimer had the last, best word on the subject (as he so often does). Besides, it’s Blazer time now, so who needs side-topics?
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Oct 3, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tolkein used "niggard" in LoTR
of course, he was an Oxford professor and knew what it meant…
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's a great story about the misunderstanding of that word.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/williams/williams020499.htm
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 1, 2009 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you also notice
that most people don’t talk about throwing “faggots” into the fire anymore…at least not in mixed company
(not that there’s anything wrong with that…)
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 2, 2009 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not a lot of use of "gay" in it's original meaning, either
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Oct 3, 2009 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Family Guy used the adverb "gaily" in its original ...
context. That happened in the episode titled “Road to the Multiverse” as a part of the scene which mockingly mimicked Disney.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 3, 2009 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
that was a great episode of Family Gay. Er, Guy.
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Oct 6, 2009 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is "fags" still used as slang for cigarettes in the UK?
Because I’m American and don’t smoke tobacco, I don’t know the answer to that question. Yet, if anyone knows it, my guess would be that it’s Norsktroll.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 3, 2009 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, it is.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Oct 3, 2009 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, all the time
Just heard someone say it the other day. “I need to pop into the shop to get a pack of fags.”
It’s kind of fun to have a bridge into both worlds at times.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 4, 2009 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Fox censors ruined those joke so badly on AD....... Idiotic.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Oct 4, 2009 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I knew the definition of "niggardly" at that time; hence, I used it ...
as a synonym for cheap to describe Howard Schultz screwing over the Seattle SuperSonics as an entity. The goal was to incite anger from people who didn’t know the true meaning of the word, though, so for that I’m a jerk. I wouldn’t have it any other way, however.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 1, 2009 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I submit it is perverse to post things that are calculated to have people think less of you.
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Oct 2, 2009 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is my take too
AK is open and honest, which I admire, and I guess part of that is purposefully linking to silly things he had said in the past that none of us would have ever found…
I think perhaps AK felt like he was being hypocritical, so to show that he himself has said stuff he regrets he links to a thing he regrets… that’s AK!
Moo—
by Mortimer on Oct 2, 2009 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think AK was born without a filter
between his brain and his mouth. That can be very refreshing but it can also get you in lots of trouble. He’s not afraid to say what he thinks and he often seems to be as hard on himself as he is on others. I’ll bet in person he’s a gentle and sensitive soul which is one reason he lives with and cares for his grandfather. That’s just my take on him.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Oct 2, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
He helps old ladies across the street
and then blogs about tripping them and throwing them down a manhole.
He’s the Internet equivalent of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. In real life, lovable, cuddly, and cute, clean-shaven with short hair, wears a bow tie.
On-line, he’s AK. No descriptives necessary.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 2, 2009 2:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Certainly sums it up, oh Savvy Sovereign
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Oct 2, 2009 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
His propensity to quote Chapter and Verse of his previous Sacred Writings makes you look like Mr. Humble City Council candidate instead of self-proclaimed Dictator of the World, Scot.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Oct 4, 2009 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Little known fact
I pay AK to make me look good by comparison.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 5, 2009 3:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dear Travis,
If you are reading this, you have better things to do.
Whatever
thetinfoil@gmail.com
by TheTinfoil on Sep 30, 2009 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
LOL
both of mine were in reference to him on the court. Not his own intelligence although I could definitely see how someone could read it that way.
But yeah… got me. I’ve mentioned a number of times that I’ll start yelling at my tv screeen “no! don’t do that! That’s stupid!!!” “YES!!!”
For the record I in no way think travis is out and out dumb, but I have taken issue with his BBIQ. Sometimes I’m right and sometimes I’m wrong such is the emotional roller coaster ride that is travis.
To be fair, i was yelling at the ENTIRE team at that point as well, not just travis, and I banned myself from watching games for a while to calm down.
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
by ratbastird on Sep 30, 2009 6:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In your defense...
…Who among us hasn’t yelled at his or her t.v. screen, "NO, TRAVIS, NO!!…er, great shot, Trout!!
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Sep 30, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course, many of your links prove that the Outlaw hate is a minority view -- or you conveniently omit retractions, like Runningboi's...
I apologize for the idiot comment
I have actually been on BE for several years now, just not with a new ID – ‘cause I don’t post much.
I think Travis is great, but he is – in many ways – ‘raw’ – after years of play. He fills a far more narrow role than it seems that he should and it takes him years to figure things out. It seems (and again much of my experience is from afar – I’ve been living in Australia) that it takes him longer than most to figure out the plays and to get with what the Blazers as 5 men on the court are doing.
That comment is money — Travis DOES remain in many ways “raw” after multiple years on the team. Call it what you want — although, as I’ve said before, much of the criticism of Travis is anti-Southern bias and further related to the fact that he came to the league straight out of HS in Mississippi rather than as a “one-and-done” college player…
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Sep 30, 2009 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A few things
1) I was showing that Travis could easily think that people hated him, and people had called him names on this site.
2) My plan was not to spend all day searching through comments for retractions, apologies, how other people reacted etc. That comment took me 5 minutes, if you wanted to spend more time on it I’m sure that you could find a lot more abusive comments. That’s also why I provided links so that people could see for themselves the exact context.
3) I’m willing to bet Travis doesn’t spend all day searching for context when/if he looks at these sites. And plus just a cursory glance at the site wouldn’t give you an understanding whose trolling, who to respect etc. The point is saying stuff like this is detrimental, and it can be understood why Travis thinks fans hate him.
4) As said before this is simply a small sample size of the people who literally said things like Travis is X, not people who have a general dislike of his game, think that he’s a cancer etc. Many more have said Travis is X even, this is what I grabbed in a 5 minute search.
5) It is a minority viewpoint and one that shouldn’t be accepted here, that’s why I included names. People have reputations on this site, and its definitely dirtied by what they have written. If they don’t like that fact its pretty simple, just don’t write it in the first place.
6) That not even a retraction :
it takes him longer than most to figure out the plays and to get with what the Blazers as 5 men on the court are doing.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Sep 30, 2009 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Let's put things in perspective
A Blazer insider once told a friend of mine that, in practice, Ruben Patterson required special treatment. For instance, when a play was being diagrammed for the team, the coach couldn’t say, “The 3 will set a screen here at the right elbow.” He’d need to say, “RUBEN will set a screen at the right elbow.”
Now THAT’S a dumb player.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Sep 30, 2009 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe like some of us it indicates a player mathematically challenged?
The point is not the perception of the player by that individual. The point is that labeling a player with pejorative words, rather than describing a specific event for what it is, creates unnecessary divisiveness. I have done many dumb things in my life but to my knowledge no one who knows me thinks of me as dumb. Most often when we label someone by their action we do not have the personal knowledge of that person to know describe their mental capabilities. In my case I do assume that anyone being paid $4M per year has achieved a success in life that few others match and deserves some respect for the achievement as well as the basic respect for all people as fellow inhabitants of the earth.
Wow- did not mean to sound so high horse. Only to provide some additional perspective to the discussion.
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Sep 30, 2009 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right, of course
It’s just that Ruben Patterson is a bit of a special case. There’s a reason that Zach Randolph sucker punched him. By at least some accounts, Ruben was a bully—not well-liked by his teammates. And then there was the babysitter incident.
But of course, it’s unnecessary to label people with pejoratives. I also think that there’s all kinds of intelligence. A person can struggle with numbers and be brilliant in other areas. You can even be both autistic and a musical genius. No one is good at everything—that’s for sure. We all have different gifts and deficiencies.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Oct 1, 2009 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the positive side, by some accounts he has very nice luggage.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Oct 4, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
when Mo drew plays on the whiteboard
he had 1, 2, R, 4, 5..
because ruben couldnt remember he was a 3
by GreatOden'sRaven on Oct 4, 2009 10:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A few things
1) I was showing that Travis could easily think that people hated him, and people had called him names on this site.
2) My plan was not to spend all day searching through comments for retractions, apologies, how other people reacted etc. That comment took me 5 minutes, if you wanted to spend more time on it I’m sure that you could find a lot more abusive comments. That’s also why I provided links so that people could see for themselves the exact context.
3) I’m willing to bet Travis doesn’t spend all day searching for context when/if he looks at these sites. And plus just a cursory glance at the site wouldn’t give you an understanding whose trolling, who to respect etc. The point is saying stuff like this is detrimental, and it can be understood why Travis thinks fans hate him.
4) As said before this is simply a small sample size of the people who literally said things like Travis is X, not people who have a general dislike of his game, think that he’s a cancer etc. Many more have said Travis is X even, this is what I grabbed in a 5 minute search.
5) It is a minority viewpoint and one that shouldn’t be accepted here, that’s why I included names. People have reputations on this site, and its definitely dirtied by what they have written. If they don’t like that fact its pretty simple, just don’t write it in the first place.
6) That not even a retraction :
it takes him longer than most to figure out the plays and to get with what the Blazers as 5 men on the court are doing.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Sep 30, 2009 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
great piece by JQ
I feel bad for Outlaw. He definitely gets some prejudice due to his Southern accent. I like him— he’s a good guy and a talented player. I am among those who don’t think he’s a great long term fit here though.
by jksnake99 on Sep 29, 2009 12:12 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Agree. For all we know, Travis might not be the most studied player but he is pretty smart at life as a player.
- Understands his role on the team, is ambitious but doesn’t make outrageous demands – at least not publicly (can’t play with this or that, need to have this many minutes or shots)
- Not afraid to take the big shots, but just as happy deferring to the bigger stars on the team
- Doesn’t misbehave off the court. Going by his tweets he likes to hang out with his friends and hit on Vegas every now and then but he doesn’t do it in excess
- His teammates love to be with him. In all those years I have never heard anyone on the team criticize Travis as harshly as some fans (that Nate sometimes gets into his players’ face seems normal).
- Has understood that he needs to work in the offseason to start from a higher level and not just coast on his length and athleticism. Last year his infection sidelined him, but at least he is trying to add to his game.
We know about his weaknesses and he might not be the best fit for the long term and be able to contribute (and earn) more elsewhere, but hating him for what he is as if he doesn’t bring something valuable to the team would be wrong. I could much easier hate Luol Deng, who is a great character guy but on the court disappears when it matters and costs three times as much doing so. At $4 million, Travis is great value. For $10 million, he would have to produce a whole lot more.
"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard
by Norsktroll on Sep 29, 2009 4:26 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
of course, he doesn't make $10 million yet and never has
his first few years were tough, but I think we’ve gotten great value for the last few. He will be interesting to watch in free agency, meaning, how other teams value him
"its tough to play with one eye, unless you're a pirate." Delonte West
"una canasta a Pau en la cara" Rudy
by Honka Playboy on Sep 29, 2009 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We are disappointed in Travis
He has shown us flashes of very good play,. he just needs to be more consistent.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
by skywaker9 on Sep 29, 2009 12:43 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
By "We" you mean "I"
I’m not the least bit disappointed
"its tough to play with one eye, unless you're a pirate." Delonte West
"una canasta a Pau en la cara" Rudy
by Honka Playboy on Sep 29, 2009 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
That's because your standards are low
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As opposed to no standards at all.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 10:51 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Why do you insist on personally attacking me ann?
Try to stay on topic, the topic is Outlaw. Instead of attacking me like a mindless goon, you should actually make a point to defend your guy.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
the topic is your over-the-top criticism of Outlaw. – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 30, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
There wouldn't be criticism
If Outlaw was a good player.
by Garces on Oct 3, 2009 6:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He scores at double figure in the NBA
while shooting at a decent percentage, and hits a decent percentage of his 3s.
Which means your comment has low BBIQ.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 3, 2009 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
There wouldn't be criticism
If this was a good post.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Oct 3, 2009 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have no problems with anyone being critical of him.
I’d just disagree with that.
The part that frosts me is that everyone is convinced that he’s peaked out as a hoopster at 25 years of age, that he’s too stupid to improve, that he has a low BBIQ. That’s all crap to me. And it keeps getting repeated all the time, which makes me even sicker of it.
Just point out what he did wrong. Don’t make blanket statements, over and over and over, about his brain power based on what he does on the basketball court. It’s tiresome. – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Oct 6, 2009 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you are judging my expectations, which can be met or not
and Outlaw has met them. Beyond my expectations, I like watching him play and he hasn’t done anything to make the team look bad. I also appreciate some of his abilities, primarily the fact that he can get his shot off against anyone and is not afraid to take big shots. I hope he’s willing and able to grow as a player so that he cements his relationship with the team. He made himself a better 3 pt shooter last year. This year I hope he develops as a rebounder.
I know, I know, his BBIQ is low, but I don’t really believe in that term. As stat-obsessed as this site gets, it seems odd that we act as if its something that can be quantified. If I was a Martian and had watched Chauncey Billups play an important, negative role in blowing two critical inbounds in the last WCF, I would wonder what Earthlings were smoking when they raved about his high BBIQ. I tend to think our views on BBIQ are informed by things that have nothing to do with the game
"its tough to play with one eye, unless you're a pirate." Delonte West
"una canasta a Pau en la cara" Rudy
by Honka Playboy on Sep 30, 2009 10:33 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Billy Ray Bates was one of the most popular Blazers
I would submit that Travis has a much higher BBIQ then BRB ever did.
"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-
by We-B-Dunkin on Oct 2, 2009 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
probably true
but Bates had much less developmental time, he basically came out of nowhere and right into the starting lineup on pure athletic ability
I saw that Breaks of the Game is being republished. If you want to read the story of that season, Halberstam’s book is the place to go
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 2, 2009 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I will check it out.
Although I remember it vividly, Billy Ray was an atheletic freak but was totally lost in Dr. Jacks intricate plays & defensive schemes.
"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-
by We-B-Dunkin on Oct 2, 2009 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My only Blazer's jersey is #25 Outlaw
He gets ripped on this site. He’s a convenient scape-goat. If he ever reads any blogs I understand exactly why he feels hated and not embraced by the fans. It is what it is. I love the guy, my favorite Blazer since the days of Pritchard’s adventures as coach of our beloved team. We have history. I believe in his future as a dominant player in this league, even it’s not with us.
The Dude abides
by noaher on Sep 29, 2009 1:19 PM PDT reply actions 5 recs
That's just 'cuz you like scamming free drinks at Annie's Bar & Grill...
My only Blazer’s jersey is #25 Outlaw
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Oct 4, 2009 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hi, Sweetie. :)
"I'm not sure SB Nation is big enough for your ego." Garces to annthefan.
" Hahahahhahahahahahhhhhahhha!!!!!!!
I think I’ll make that my new signature. I’m such an uppity woman!" annthefan to Garces
by annthefan on Oct 4, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You get a rec from me
Of course he was talkin’ smack when he tweeted about out of this world money. It was kind of dumb to take that any other way.
He’s got it down. If he wants to be valued, it won’t be by jacking up shots he shouldn’t take to inflate his stats. It will be by helping his team win. And if he helps them win, lots of teams will want him — and so will we.
Ultimately, the problem comes down to this — he had a bad playoff series, and we lost. And if he had a good playoff series, we might well have won. Other guys had a bad playoff series, too, but Travis helped us win in the regular season, so people thought he would do it in the playoffs. And he happened to be at the position where our opponent was strong, so his bad series hurt worse than anyone else.
Sure, Travis has weaknesses in his game, and anyone can see them. So some fans were ready to see him traded for someone who doesn’t have those weaknesses even before the playoffs. I understand why. I understand the reasoning. I happen to value what Travis brings at a higher level than my concerns about his weaknesses.
It just so happens that KP and Nate, to this point, also value what he brings more than they are concerned about his weaknesses. And so Travis stays in Portland and still gets playing time. Fans who think KP and Nate don’t see the weaknesses and are making dumb moves or are blind are in fact being dumb themselves. Obviously they see it. Nate yells at Travis.
But they value what he brings enough to override that. I do, too. I hope Travis is a Trailblazer his entire career. And I hope he keeps working on his game and improving. He’s not done, yet. Next year, he’ll probably take five dribbles!
Go, Travis!
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 29, 2009 1:44 PM PDT reply actions 3 recs
I cannot believe Travis is responsible for the round one playoff loss to Houston
That’s going a smidgen too far. Not surprisingly Travis had playoff jitters and wasn’t on his A game. But singling him out as the reason the team lost is really unfair. If you asked me (and you didn’t) whose to blame for the Houston loss I’m looking at Coach for sinking us in game one by thinking Joel was going to play Yao straight up and it resulted in total FAILURE which cost more then a loss but psychologically gave the edge to Houston as well. Can’t pin that on Travis who did clam up. Now that travis has that behind him, I expect a much more confident and composed playoff performance by Travis, and by God it had better be with the PTB.
"Junk is not, like alcohol or weed, a means to increased enjoyment of life. Junk is not a kick. It is a way of life." William S. Burroughs
by bow4meow on Sep 29, 2009 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
coaching and experience, not performance.
That series was lost when Rick Adelman blew his nose before stepping on to floor for game 1.
We were totally handled. While some playoff series losses I can see attributed to performance, this was not such a case.
Houston knew exactly how to stop our offense. And we had no plan B. End of story.
by Blazin' on Sep 29, 2009 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There does not seem to be consensus on who to blame but perhaps most will admit that multiple factors were causes
I remember the player who carries the most respect on the team saying it was toughness that we lacked. More recently he is saying we need to focus on defense. We win as a team and lose as a team.
Statistically we played one good game defensively of the six. Do that every game we will likely win every series. That seems a progression for a young team to buy into the concept. It does not seem like a coaching failure because the coaches have been emphasizing this from the first year. Consider that only one other coach in the history of the NBA has taken his team to this level of sustained improvement over these last four years (three years of improvement) and the coaches are best considered one of the highest strengths of the team. And be encouraged that nearly every player is echoing Brandon’s words this year. To me that means that the coaches have indeed gotten through and the progression likely continues.
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Sep 30, 2009 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Causes?
Houston was the better team.
Not sure why it is necessary to assign any blame. Portland overachieved the entire season, and just making the playoffs was a success.
I only add coaching to experience in qualifying the loss to Houston because of how Adelman completely outfoxed McMillen. They knew how to defuse our offense. And if we did anticipate that, I missed how. Judging from our desperate attempt to get Brandon to become a playmaker (in other words, to change the way he played all year) demonstrated how outmaneuvered we were.
by Blazin' on Sep 30, 2009 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Blazers actually UNDERachieved last season.
According to Hollinger, at least (insider):
[The] Blazers had the offensive and defensive results of a 61-win team and were very unfortunate to win only 54 games. What that means going forward is that the Blazers are in much better shape than most people realize.
Pubert Jones > Hedo
by rockingharder on Sep 30, 2009 9:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
Hollinger doesn’t say the Blazers underachieved last year. He is saying their performance merited more wins. At least mathematically.
Compared to expectations at the beginning of the season, the Blazers definitely overachieved last season.
That wasn’t the point of my comment anyway. But thank you so much for the argumentative name-drop.
by Blazin' on Sep 30, 2009 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm.
I think we understood it differently. I saw it as: Based on their win/loss record, the Blazers underachieved according to Hollinger’s formula.
And yeah, I realized that wasn’t the main point of your post, but I was surprised to see that they overachieved after reading Hollinger’s column.
Pubert Jones > Hedo
by rockingharder on Sep 30, 2009 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe Hollinger's formula is wrong
…if it’s indicating more wins than actually occurred.
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Oct 2, 2009 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Efficiency differential isn't Hollinger's formula
And it’s a very, very widely accepted method for judging teams overall. Ask any sabermetrician (most of whom disagree about individual player stats) and they’ll all tell you that it’s the best single measure.
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
by austinpwnz on Oct 2, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll take your word for it
I was just throwing out another scenario. :)
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Oct 2, 2009 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No model is perfect
This one does pretty well. Within a couple wins is well within the expected results, if towards the lower end.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 3, 2009 1:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hollinger doesn’t say the Blazers underachieved last year. He is saying their performance merited more wins. At least mathematically
That sounds like a nerdy way of saying that they underachieved.
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 12:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think so
That is saying they got fewer wins than their play merited. Blazin’ is making the counter point that they overachieved because they played better than they were expected to play.
He is right, they played better than HE expected them to play. :) Not better than I did, though. But he had most of the pundits on his side, so we wasn’t lonely in his wrongness. Compared to general expectations, they overachieved.
Maybe he is saying compared to talent and experience they overachieved as well. I don’t believe so. The level of talent is extremely high, and the level of maturity for such a young team is high as well.
They did about what should have been expected of a super-talented young team. Won a lot of regular season games, and were inconsistent in the playoffs. If they had an easier matchup, they might have won a series, and if they won a series they might have hit their rhythm. But it was no surprise that they lost in the first round.
Neither overachieved nor underachieved in my book.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hollinger is saying the Blazers were unlucky, not that they underachieved.
by jksnake99 on Oct 1, 2009 1:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or is he being kind?
Do mathematicians say “unlucky” as a matter of course?
Seven games short of expected statistically out of 61 might be hard to explain only by luck.
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Oct 1, 2009 11:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mathematicians would say something like
Deviated from expected mean by X standard deviations. Oops, I just let my geek flag fly.
I think the unlucky comment was mostly attributed to our FT defense. As of current, I do not know how we can improve our FT defense.
by xedubx on Oct 2, 2009 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I might be remembering wrong
And I didn’t look real hard for it, but I remember some article last year or the year before showing that teams hit a higher rate of FTs against us for like 5 years in a row now…
I don’t think it was only this recent season, but a reoccurring mysterious problem.
I dunno.
I know Hollinger’s article wasn’t saying that, but I remember another article point it out from a while ago…
by Mortimer on Oct 2, 2009 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We need to poison the drinking fountain
in the visiting locker room with some kind of aphrodisiac so they can’t keep their eyes off the Blazer Dancers while shooting free throws.
I’m always afraid that every time we discuss this someone is going to post that horrible video.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 2, 2009 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've posted about this before
It seems obvious to me that the “thundersticks” are counterproductive. Far from being distracting or intimidating, the waving motion of these white objects behind the backboard do a remarkable job of bringing the stationary red rim into sharp, highlighted focus. You couldn’t ask for a better shooting background.
In addition, the sticks provide a consistent “white noise” that, again, helps the shooter focus on the task at hand. By contrast, silence interrupted by occasional, unpredictable screaming and heckling is very distracting.
Pro golf provides insight here. The reason golfers are so fussy about complete silence and lack of movement in their field of vision while the golfer is playing his or her shots is because, in the stillness of a golf tournament, any sound or movement is unexpected and therefore startling. Numerous pro golfers have stated that if the crowd were CONTINUALLY moving and making noise—as in, say, a college football game—it wouldn’t bother them a bit.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Oct 3, 2009 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good to know
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Oct 3, 2009 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do not know how we can improve our FT defense
(I made a couple of suggestions in the “insider” thread that got put down like an old dog)
1) replace the thunder sticks with skinny balloons, in the end zones
2) move the 300 level fans to courtside, they tend to yell the loudest
3) coach Lucas needs to teach “Intimidation 101, techniques for ‘getting into your opponents head’ in-between free throw attempts”"
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 2, 2009 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So it DID even out
After being so lucky to win 41 the year before, we got unlucky and only won 54.
Now it’s time to get lucky again!
M—
by Mortimer on Oct 2, 2009 1:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I note that my predictions
of 39 and 55 have very closely tracked what the model and Hollinger said our performance deserved.
The only benefit of this comment is to boost my own ego, which is already intolerable.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 3, 2009 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But as future ruler of the world you don't count
Since you can see into the future and know you are the future ruler of the world seeing into the future to know the wins totals is too easy. Hmmm – how did you miss those two games?
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Oct 3, 2009 9:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disturbing question
Let’s change the subject.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 4, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't blame Travis for the loss
Like I said, other people had a bad series, too — just that his hurt worse than the others.
If Blake plays well, or Nic plays well, or Nate prepares us better (yes, I agree, Nate gets a share of the blame), the series is different.
But I understand why Travis gets the blame for it from some, those who take that view have an argument to make. The argument they don’t have is that one bad series negates everything Travis has done and everything he brings to this team.
I also expect that, unless KP trades him, Travis will have a much better playoff performance this year. We’ll get a higher seed and a weaker opponent, and we’ll whip them soundly, probably in five games. And then we’ll be going into the next series with confidence, experience of having won a series and lost a series, and ready to play. And we’ll need it, because the second round will be a dog fight. But Travis will play much, much better, as will the rest of the team.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 5:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
shaking my head
I just can’t agree that
other people had a bad series, too — just that his hurt worse than the others.
Travis did not meet expectations and performed less then average. I think we can agree on that. What I can’t swallow is
just that his hurt worse than the others.
I suppose that to you it did hurt more then others. I too was disappointed that Travis did not explode off the bench ala Vinnie Johnson Pistons era. When I examine what hurt the most about that playoff series… well, it just doesn’t boil down to Travis. Fact is, the Rockets outplayed and outcoached us. I could go down the entire PTB roster and point fingers and attach blame. I shouldn’t have done so earlier by calling out Coach as the “reason” we lost. It’s a team effort and the Captain went down with the ship.
What’s important is the leaks in the boat have been plugged, the Cap is saltier and the crew no longer greenhorns. So one more thing we can agree on, next year Travis will play much better.
There are some people who aren’t smart
by bow4meow on Sep 30, 2009 7:04 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
It hurt worse
because the Rockets PFs were killing us and we needed to make them hurt back at the other end. If Travis plays well, we do that, and they have to adjust.
The past is the past. Learn from it and go on.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 8:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It hurt worse because he had easily the biggest drop from his regular season performance to his playoff performance.
Nobody else was particularly close.
by jksnake99 on Sep 30, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don't fault Nate for being outcoached.
Adelman’s been around a long time and is one of the best.
The real test is how he tries to expand the offense this year so it is more resilient.
If we go to the playoffs this year with a one dimensional attack, I will fault Nate.
by Blazin' on Sep 30, 2009 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
not fronting Yao in Game one killed us
he was able to get the ball where he wanted and absolutely killed the PTB. Yao hardly missed a shot and the Rockets established a presence that the PTB and set the tone in game one. It was too deep a hole for such an inexperienced team to climb out of.
Once the PTB began fronting Yao and denying him easy looks, Scola played extremely well. Our PF’s, Travis included didn’t excel against their PF play. My point was Travis was not to blame because his game wasn’t what was hoped for. The Rockets had guys who stepped up every time the PTB adjusted, and the PTB couldn’t make the Rockets adjust to anything they threw out. Inserting Rudy into the starting rotation in the final loss was a sign of desperation and exasperation.
Adding Miller and a year of seasoning by the core should eliminate the one-dimensional put it on Brandon Roy’s shoulder gameplan.
There are some people who aren’t smart
by bow4meow on Sep 30, 2009 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not only that
but you can only do so much with the tools you have. Nate’s tools are becoming sharper and will be even sharper this year. He’s done a fantastic job. You do not see young teams like the blazers with so much potential, generally reaching their potential. Particularly when they had no vets to really help them out in that growth process.
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
by ratbastird on Sep 30, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
agree with both of these comments
although I thought we defended Houston as well as can be expected. I thought the series was lost in Houston’s ability to shut us down.
And I agree that Nate was limited by the tools he had and the youthfulness of the team. That said, the tone for our playoff series was set in the early weeks of the season, when we had that brutal schedule, and we fell back on Brandon to singlehandedly keep us in the race.
Later in the season, as the team developed some confidence, we saw more passing and collaborative offense. This is why I think it is largely a mental thing and not just a question of limited tools.
Facing Houston, the pressure saw us revert to the early season mode.
For Nate to counter this psychology, he has to start at the beginning of the season de-emphasizing Brandon in the offense. We all know that when the game is on the line, that is who we’re going to. But I think to correct for this softness, you overcompensate and avoid the isolation play until the fourth quarter. And avoid it altogether in the preseason.
Andre Miller may provide an opportunity to diversify the offense. In the first few weeks of training camp a tone and tactic will be set that will determine these dynamics at the end of the season. That is how Nate can learn from last year’s playoffs loss.
by Blazin' on Sep 30, 2009 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
KP and Nate, to this point, also value what he brings more than they are concerned about his weaknesses.
But I think their pursuit of Hedo and Millsap was evidence that they would like to upgrade Travis’ position. And I think you did too, back in July. What changed?
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 29, 2009 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nothing changed
I would like us to have another big man. That doesn’t mean I want to trade Travis. It means I wish we had both — Travis as our first backup, who creates matchup nightmares for opposing second string PFs, and a banger to step in against guys like Maxiell, etc.
I actually think it is possible Pendergraph is that guy, but now we probably won’t know until it is too late to decide for this year. A backup C/PF who can finish blowouts at center. 12th man on the active roster. Juwan can’t play center or I’d be fine with him, though it would be nice if we had someone who is a little better than him.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 5:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
how many more donuts can KP eat, before his roster explodes?
I would like us to have another big man. That doesn’t mean I want to trade Travis. It means I wish we had both
First of all, Pendergraph is a rookie, he wasn’t going to be “the guy” to backup LMA. There was only one guy like that who was available in the draft when Jeff and Dante were selected, and his initials are “DB”
Keep Travis, and add a quality veteran PF/C?…you really are Bob Whitsitt, aren’t you?
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 30, 2009 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No Bob Whittsett would have traded for Shawn Kemp
KP is building for now and the future.
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Sep 30, 2009 6:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you missed the point
jscot was suggesting that KP keep Outlaw and add another good PF/C. That kind of roster “overstuffing” is reminiscient of Whitsitt’s overloaded teams in ‘99-00. It’s possible to reach a point where “too much talent” leads to diminishing returns, and the current roster is already teetering on the brink of that precipice
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 30, 2009 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, KP has already done it
Except that instead of a PF/C, he added Howard, who isn’t a C. And obviously, I would have liked a guy who KP says “I know he can still play” rather than one who KP says “I think can still play.”
You yourself say you want a guy who doesn’t care if he only gets limited minutes.
If Pendergraph were healthy, I would be happy with our roster. I don’t have the same “has to be a vet” issue you have. Rookies can contribute as role players on playoff teams. Johnny Davis did.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 11:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
apple, meet orange
Rookies can contribute as role players on playoff teams. Johnny Davis did.
Davis was a lightning quick PG who (even though talented) probably wouldn’t have gotten much playoff exposure if Twardzik hadn’t injured his ankle. Jack also had veteran Herm Gilliam, who had some spectacular playoff games in ’77, especially in the L*kers series
But we’re talking about rookie big men, and that’s a whole ‘nuther animal. I agree that Howard brings experience to the PF position, and he’ll be useful in the post season for short spurts. What I have a problem with is the concept that LMA is a 3rd center. That wasn’t the case last year (Frye played center when Greg/Joel were out, not LMA) and even though LMA has added some bulk he’s not the guy you want ot rely on in the pivot in case of injury or foul trouble to Oden/Przy.
But my point, as you’ve artfully tried to evade, was that if KP was to bring in a PF worthy of backing up LMA on a regular basis, that would leave Travis without any role on the team (except as a change-of-pace forward in a small lineup, which Cunningham could also be, during the regular season—but remember, NO small lineups in the playoffs!) So, instead of getting value for Travis in a deal to bring in a veteran PF, you’re relegating Outlaw to the bench which helps neither his career or his trade value to Portland.
I’m trying to find a way to “help” TO get his money (elsewhere) and improve the Blazer’s playoff roster, not create more logjams and tension on the team
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not artfully evading
Pendergraph was supposed to be that third center. And he was supposed to be that change-of-pace backup PF. Travis is the normal backup PF, and better than the vast majority of backup PFs.
When Pendergraph went down, I wish KP would have grabbed a backup PF/C.
Travis is fine as a backup PF next to a real center, and in most cases, including in the playoffs, he’d be fine.
Kurt Rambis played 20 mpg in the playoffs as a rookie in 82. His team did ok. He’s exactly the kind of player you are always talking about. I mentioned Davis because he’s a Blazer.
Kevin McHale played 17 mpg in all 17 playoff games on a championship Boston team as a rookie.
Boston won a championship with a rookie Greg Kite as injury cover. He didn’t play much, but they played that season knowing if Parish or McHale got hurt they were going to be relying on a rookie.
The “can’t have a rookie big man” in the playoffs idea is just wrong. If the guy is good enough, there is no problem with it.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have a better example
Rodman and Salley
but you don’t want to lean too hard on rookie big men in the post season, as a general rule. They tend to be foul magnets
If the guy is good enough, there is no problem with it.
You mean, like DeJuan Blair good? I wouldn’t have made a peep about the Blazer’s baclup PF depth this summer if KP had drafted the beast from the east. Pendy is no Blair, even when healthy
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody is leaning hard
If one of our big men goes down, then the other two will play 35 mpg in the playoffs, Travis will play 35-40, and Pendy and/or Howard will provide foul trouble cover.
If none of them go down, Pendy might get a few minutes here and there.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is October 1st, not the 31st
then the other two will play 35 mpg in the playoffs, Travis will play 35-40, and Pendy and/or Howard will provide foul trouble cover.
Don’t give me nightmares, like that!
I don’t time to go back over all of this, but my take beginning last winter was that the Blazer’s roster didn’t have “enough” toughness at the backup 4-5 with Travis/Frye, even if everyone was healthy. Howard is just “okay”, Pend/’Ham are unproven. I want one more quality big who can play PF, if he can slide to C, all the better.
Outlaw is a short-timer in Portland, and he’s got an expiring contract that should be attractive to another team. Putting 2 + 2 together = deal Trav for a backup 4/5, like Jeff Foster. It may not happen, but I’d be less “scared” about a post-season “catastrophe” if the bench had more experience and a better option than Howard in case of injury, or deep foul trouble
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought you wanted a backup center
We got backup PFs, maybe not as good as Blair, but Blair is already a small PF. He can’t play C.
We are better situated or as good as any other team in the league with our front line. Oden and Joel might just be the best combo this side of Howard/Gortat, and a stronger LMA can fill in non-embarrassingly.
Yes, it would be bad for the playoffs if Oden or Joel were hurt, but that’s the same for any other team. Almost no one has a decent 3rd string center, they got someone who’d play out of position at center. I, personally, would love a 3rd string center of the Collison variety, or even the Nesterovic variety. Someone who can PLAY. But, almost every team is looking for just a somewhat decent 2nd string center, whereas we are fully stacked at the 5 right now under normal conditions.
Hell, most teams wish they had Joel as a starter, let alone Oden. We are very strong at the 5, but JUST LIKE ANYONE we are susceptible to injury at the 5. What team isn’t?
That doesn’t mean I don’t want a bonafide 3rd string big man who can play center, but I don’t think it is a huge problem. It is a standard risk.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Oct 1, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understand his point, though
If you don’t have a bonafide center, you want a bonafide PF beside him. And if LMA slides over to center for 15 mpg because one of our centers is out, then we have a bonafide Travis to play PF beside him, and that is not exactly a rebounding powerhouse.
For that scenario, Channing was better, and Juwan would hardly make me feel optimistic about it.
But chances are pretty good our centers are ok, and perhaps Pendy can provide that 10-15 mpg if something does go wrong.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, it definitely won't be a good situation if Oden or Joel go down
Not at all.
But, it’s a situation every team faces if an integral part of the rotation goes down, and worse if it is a center.
I don’t mean to belittle it’s potential impact, just that it is a pretty normal risk. I much prefer we not put ourselves in a position to be hurt by Oden or Joel going down and get a 3rd string big, like Nesterovic at least, who can sop up minutes and not hurt the team by being out there.
M—
by Mortimer on Oct 1, 2009 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you don’t have a bonafide center, you want a bonafide PF beside him. And if LMA slides over to center
Pretty much. Going into the draft I like Blair because he was a rebounder, and that’s not LMA’s strength. Even if Greg/Joel were 100% healthy, DeJuan could’ve come in off the bench for 10-12 mpg and gotten after it on the glass. (And do you notice what Nate is harping on, right now? Rebounding? Uh-huh…)
So KP “passed” on DB, and chose Pend/‘Ham (I’ve “gotten over” that decision, but I’ll still be watching to see how DB does with the Spurs.) As for the Blazer rookies, I’m more optimistic about Dante than Jeff, both short and long term. They’re both ’tweeners, but DC has more skills than Pend…Jeff is very mechanical and can only really guard other 4-5 ’tweeners.
(And now that he’s hurt he’s going to be way bvehind the learning curve, so expecting any meaningful contribution from him during his rookie year is wishful thinking.)
But even before he heard about his “impingement” I wasn’t convinved that JP could step in and get backup PF minutes and be “ready to go” in the post-season. I mean, you can put a rookie “out there” in the playoffs, but most of them will be a target for the opposition to exploit, not a positive force. And too often, the starters will get 2 fouls in the 2nd quarter and Nate will have to send in his “4th” big man off the bench to play 5+ minutes before halftime. I want “that guy” to be solid, not a green rook or Juwan Howard playing center, etc.
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't read everything in this thread
But my initial impressions are…some people say we have too much talent (talent-stuffing) and others say we need to make sure if someone goes down we have to have quality backups. I think those two are mutually exclusive.
I’m on the side of accumulating as much young talent as possible, moving up by combining young talent in trades for better players, and not worrying about PT issues. At all. If one of our starters gets injured (something that is no more likely nor less likely than other teams) we’re in a much better position to cover for it than for example the Rockets were with McGrady (okay, probably bad example, but ON PAPER they didn’t have the quality backups we do).
Long way of saying don’t worry about too much depth or not enough depth. We’ve got the right amount.
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Oct 2, 2009 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Er
The first paragraph was meant to mean that getting rid of players because you have too much talent is mutually exclusive to being prepared for injury to key players. You need to be over-stuffed with talent precisely because of injury issues.
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Oct 2, 2009 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
moving up by combining young talent in trades for better players
I agree with this. But it’s all a matter of timing. If KP waits until he “needs” to make a deal (injury to a big man, player agent demands a trade) he won’t get as much value for his players as if he makes the desperate GMs come to him for his young, inexpensive talent
Nate told KP “that’s enough” when Miller/Howard were signed. If everyone stays healthy, no one will “get enough” PT for their belly to be filled. Nate knows this, and has already told them he didn’t want to hear any whining about minutes
this reminds me of the old saying “the beatings will continue until morale improves” The Blazer wing players will be like Oliver Twist in the orphanage, going up to Nate and asking “please sir, could I have some more?”
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 2, 2009 5:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But with the depth we have both KP and Nate say we don't need to make a trade
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Oct 3, 2009 9:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
spark.
Rudy and Travis are the guys that have the mentality to come in to a game and seize the moment. Call it a spark.
While the tendency is to attribute the 54 wins to our starting unit, I wonder if we would be anywhere near that total without the contributions of Travis, Rudy and Sergio. The Spanish Connection had an impact last season in that they made defenses shift gears. Travis was the extra weapon that also freed up the starting scorers, by making the defenses work harder, work differently.
As for the question of Travis’ intelligence.
We love being being backseat coaches because we love our team and we love the game.
Being “backseat coaches” is one thing. Speculating on the personal qualities (intelligence for example) of people you don’t know, is in a whole other league in terms of arrogance.
by Blazin' on Sep 29, 2009 1:55 PM PDT reply actions 3 recs
I'll agree
however, I have not seen that in writing. I’ve only heard about it in rumors. If it existed on talk shows, I dismiss it as boneheads trying to create drama rather than anything fans actually think.
The backseat coaching is more along the lines of the BBIQ and what we as fans think should happen (not all of us agree and some of us are just plain wrong, but we still do it). It really wasn’t a reference to his intelligence or anything else.
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
by ratbastird on Sep 29, 2009 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
culture of the sports fan
i guess you could call it the price of being a rock star, but fans seem to feel entitled to judge the quality of their stars as people.
What I find so curious about it is that these are people that most of us never meet. Of course, we judge their quality as basketball players. But how anyone would think to judge the quality of the person is beyond me.
by Blazin' on Sep 29, 2009 9:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah i've caught myself doing that as well
and attempt to back off. One reason why i no longer own a TV. The marketing machine/gossip machine irks me.
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
by ratbastird on Sep 30, 2009 6:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
rec for "arrogance"
That is exactly what it is.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 5:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe you haven't joined any of the gameday threads, Rat.
Sometimes the unwarrented vitriol towards Travis was so disgusting I had to leave before I got banned forever. Even if I weren’t Trav’s biggest fan I’d take offense at the venomous and vicious words used against him. True, many of those comments were made by the mentally and morally challenged trolls who disappear during the off-season but they’re around. They’re the cancer. There are regulars here who don’t care for Travis much but most of them don’t use the kind of language against him that the bandwagon jumpers do. If Travis reads this, I hope he’ll consider the source of those derogatory comments he sees. I love him even more now.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 29, 2009 2:33 PM PDT reply actions 14 recs
I agree Ann
There are good ways and bad ways to express what’s on one’s mind. – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 29, 2009 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He sounds super self conscious about the fan’s opinion and that concerns me. No, it makes me feel guilty.
Backcourt game - 24/7
by pxilpooshr on Sep 29, 2009 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Players should not read blogs, period.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Sep 30, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed
They should assume that we’re a bunch of couch potatoes who don’t know jack about basketball. Their job is to please their coaches—not to worry about what a bunch of wannabes type.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Sep 30, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Er, but they shouldn't say--or even imply--that in media interviews
Otherwise we’re back to the ’sheed/ Bonzi days.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Sep 30, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, athletes have every right to read blogs.
They shouldn’t overreact to criticism, though.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Sep 30, 2009 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whether they "have the right"
and whether they “should” are two different things.
It isn’t recommended.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 11:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why shouldn't professional athletes read blogs?
I detest thin-skinned, weak-minded people who can’t handle criticism—regardless of their profession.
If a professional athlete decides not to read blogs ‘cause their feelings get hurt easily, then they’ve got a glaring character flaw that should be dealt with pronto.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 1, 2009 12:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Distraction
What is the benefit? If they start listening to fan analysis of their game, rather than coach analysis, they lose focus. If they start listening to fan analysis of other players, it can impact on-court behavior. If they start listening to fan analysis of coaching decisions, it can undermine coaching authority and team play.
Nothing to be gained, a lot to be lost.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you guys even talking about Outlaw anymore?
Who’s the athlete that overreacted to criticism, or that we know reads blogs, or that we know is thin skinned?
Are you guys talking about Terrell Owens?
by tominhawaii on Oct 1, 2009 3:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He wasn't reading Blazers Edge
He was reading a blog Jason Quick wrote about Outlaw. Quick went to visit Outlaw in Mississippi so Outlaw checked the story after it was posted. I doubt Outlaw gets the Oregonian mailed to him in Mississippi.
Folks are making is sound like players never check the paper or magazine after they were interviewed for it. I know for a fact lots of guys buy multiple copies of magazines when they are on the cover.
Just another BE mountain out of a mole hill.
by tominhawaii on Oct 1, 2009 3:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, sure
They never read Bedge.
Let’s see. Quirky sense of humor. Initials T.O. Screen identity starts “to”. Doesn’t like the term BBIQ. Doesn’t like low BBIQ being attributed to Travis.
I’m connecting the dots.
And coming up with something that makes even less sense than my usual absurdities.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 4:10 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
if I remember correctly
there was an article last year that mentioned some of Travis’ peeps reading the blogs and reporting to him about all of the “hate”
Outlaw’s quote back then was “they all hatin’ on me” or words to that affect
life in the big city, and Portlanders are relatively tame on the “vitriolic sport’s fans spectrum”
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh..my...lawd
Testify Ann! First and foremost, if you don’t like Travis Outlaw the person, there’s something wrong with you. Different people have different opinions on his game (I LOVE Outlaw as a 20-25 mpg swingman who provides an offensive spark), but that’s no excuse for some of the crap that gets pitched his way.
#25
Give Rashad Floyd a permanent slot on 95.5 the Game
by blazeraddict on Sep 29, 2009 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
rec
ann, you’re awesome.
"What I'm not looking for is, uh, some big overgrown monster that's always thinkin' about food."
by Starvin' Marvin on Sep 29, 2009 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
even if you do hate me
I still have a common interest in <3’ing travis
"What I'm not looking for is, uh, some big overgrown monster that's always thinkin' about food."
by Starvin' Marvin on Sep 29, 2009 10:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What?!! I don't hate you. Weren't we just playing?
Although I do wish you’d be more diligent in picking up your dirty socks.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 29, 2009 10:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
my Dirty Socks have been gone forever
"What I'm not looking for is, uh, some big overgrown monster that's always thinkin' about food."
by Starvin' Marvin on Sep 29, 2009 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But the odor remains. ;p
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 29, 2009 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
they'll be back soon enough
mods are workin on it :)
"What I'm not looking for is, uh, some big overgrown monster that's always thinkin' about food."
by Starvin' Marvin on Sep 29, 2009 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've seen you disappear.
I’ve thought about getting banned for it. Who knows? Maybe I will this year.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 29, 2009 11:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've disappeared but I've never been banned or warned.
There’s always a first time though.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 29, 2009 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dear Ann
When I rule the world, you’ll get a big promotion.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 5:53 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Oh! Thank you, thank you, my Titillating Titan!
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice use of alliteration
You get 5 bonus points.
by DonkeyShins on Sep 30, 2009 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If she gets 5 bonus points for alliteration
She has about 3 million bonus points by now.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uh oh
Minus 5 points for hyperbole.
by DonkeyShins on Sep 30, 2009 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you overreact
That’s my opinion
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 6:46 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
That would be your opinion. You're welcome to it.
We’ll consider the source.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh ann, you're probably going to blow a gasket once we unload Travis
It’s going to be a sad day for you.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope. He'll be somewhere where fans have better BBIQ.
You’ll be the one mourning.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Totally unrelated to the topic at hand
But prompted by Anne’s signature:
Where the heck is QualityPie?
by DonkeyShins on Sep 30, 2009 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good question. I've wondered myself.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He posted about having some life changes
and that he wasn’t going to be here as much.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don't mean
He’s become a Lakers fan!?!
by DonkeyShins on Sep 30, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would search for it
but I’m lazy.
He was moving back to Portland, and something else was happening. Don’t remember what.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I loved this!
He talked about putting his work in this summer, an area that has been lacking in his previous six seasons. I asked where he felt he improved.
"I would have to say and I hate to use the word, because I don’t believe in it, but basketball IQ. But just my whole aspect of looking at the game. I used to look at it as scoring mentality. But now it’s like I look at it as, what’s my advantage? I mean, I know I can get my shot off against anyone, but now it’s kind of like, we know you can get your shot off, but can you get in the lane, create for others, or can you score when the team needs it?’’
Criticisms about his basketball IQ have followed him since he arrived in Portland out of high school. And, truthfully, there were times when his inability to remember plays, or defensive principles were his biggest obstacles in getting onto the court.
And people have long assumed that Outlaw wasn’t very smart, perhaps because of his country drawl, perhaps because of his anxiety around large groups of media, or because he never attended college. He would admit that books and school were never his forte, but at the same time, Outlaw is one of the wisest guys on the team. He has an incredible ability to assess a situation and break it down to the simplest and most logical of terms.
I asked him how he knew one of the knocks on him was about his basketball IQ.
"I read the blog, and I saw some of it,’’ he said almost sheepishly. "I wanted to write back on it, but I said some things don’t deserve a response. Everybody has their opinion, and me sitting and arguing about it ain’t gonna solve it.’’
I’m not going to sit around and argue about it either Travis. – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 29, 2009 2:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
here's a great observation by Rat
> My end conclusion on Travis is that we, as fans, never know the whole story.
But there are so many who think they do. – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 29, 2009 2:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I have no reason to doubt Travis's intelligence.
But I get the idea that some people will defend anyone who’s called not smart, as if that’s never a valid criticism to make of someone. That doesn’t make sense to me. There are some people who aren’t smart.
Disclaimer: everything I know about basketball I learned on Blazersedge.
by pualo on Sep 29, 2009 2:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the question is how anyone here knows anything
"its tough to play with one eye, unless you're a pirate." Delonte West
"una canasta a Pau en la cara" Rudy
by Honka Playboy on Sep 29, 2009 10:04 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
It just seems like
if you say someone is short or slow or a bad shooter or something, then it’s fine, but if you say someone makes bad decisions than suddenly you’re an ass. What’s the difference?
Disclaimer: everything I know about basketball I learned on Blazersedge.
by pualo on Sep 29, 2009 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh come on. Earlier today I wrote a long, drawn out response
to your first comment but canceled it. I can see now that was the right thing to do. If you can’t see the difference between saying someone made a bad decision and calling them stupid it’s totally pointless to try to explain it to you because you probably won’t get it. Get it?
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 29, 2009 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
What if you make a ton of bad decisions? Is there ever a point where you are stupid?
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 6:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that's in fact the definition of being stupid.
Disclaimer: everything I know about basketball I learned on Blazersedge.
by pualo on Sep 30, 2009 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's what I would think too
But apparently pointing out that a rash of bad decisions = low bbiq is being a jerk. Only at BE….
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If the history of your comments is any indication
you should allow others to make all your decisions for you.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ann, the only time I ever see you contribute is when there's a Travis thread
I would put my body of work here at BE up against yours all week and twice on Sunday if that’s where you want to take this.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you both have a stubborn consistency.
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 30, 2009 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
heh.
My team went to the playoffs in my first year.
by pxilpooshr on Sep 30, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I read your comments. I just don't think they warrent
a response. We obviously come here for different reasons. I come here to have fun and enjoy myself. You come here to pontificate and cast aspersions. Fortunately, our paths don’t cross much.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You really want to make a poll on who contributes more to BEdge?
annthefan or leeroyjenkins?
Kind of a poor decision…
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 30, 2009 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you alleging
poor blog IQ?
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that's actually the definition of insanity
where one does the same thing over and over, expecting different result. So, Trout isn’t stupid or have low BBIQ. He’s actually insane! (in a good, whacky neighbor kind of way)
by xedubx on Sep 30, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Defination of Stupid
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2009.
Main Entry: 1stu·pid
Pronunciation: \ˈstü-pəd, ˈstyü-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French stupide, from Latin stupidus, from stupēre to be numb, be astonished — more at type
Date: 1541
1 a : slow of mind : obtuse b : given to unintelligent decisions or acts : acting in an unintelligent or careless manner c : lacking intelligence or reason : brutish
2 : dulled in feeling or sensation : torpid
3 : marked by or resulting from unreasoned thinking or acting : senseless
4 a : lacking interest or point b : vexatious, exasperating <the stupid car won’t start>
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Sep 30, 2009 7:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All you need is Forest Gump
Stupid is as stupid does.
Disclaimer: everything I know about basketball I learned on Blazersedge.
by pualo on Sep 30, 2009 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you model your life after Gump you might be disappointed in the results
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Oct 3, 2009 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In America there are no dumb people
(who will admit they are dumb)
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 6:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
HI, I’m dumb.
My team went to the playoffs in my first year.
by pxilpooshr on Sep 30, 2009 6:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You’re anti-American!!!!!!!!!!!!
I get the paper, so I don't care!
by Name's Ash on Sep 30, 2009 9:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Get that commie out of here!
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 30, 2009 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Better dead than red (state).
My team went to the playoffs in my first year.
by pxilpooshr on Sep 30, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I feel bad for him, no one wants to be called stupid or feel unloved.
Love you Travis.
by bustabucket on Sep 29, 2009 3:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Pay me 6 mil a year and you can call me whatever you want
Poor Travis. Many Americans can’t make their house payments but poor Travis because he rightfully takes abuse for not living up to expectations.
Please.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
You don't live up to my expectations. Does that make you stupid?
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don't have any expectations of me, you have no idea who I am
I’ve watched Travis struggle to think for 6 years. I understand that you get enraged at anyone who points out Travis’s flaws. That doesn’t bother me in the least.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All we have to know you by is the way you post.
That’s the only thing you’ve given us to draw conclusions about you.
Is she wrong? – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 30, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't get enraged at anyone who point's out Travis's
flaws. I get enraged at people who call him stupid. I wouldn’t expect you to know this but there’s a vast difference.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All NBA basketball players are overpaid to some extent (unlike say D-League players, who can be lucky to make $30,000 for their work. Most of them don’t). If I would constantly compare my workload to that of basketball players and what I get paid, I would have to hysterically laugh and cry bitterly when watching Jerome James. Or most minimum-salary end-of-bench players. Would I sit on the end of the Blazers bench and play in practice for 8 months if I got paid 800k for it? Heck yeah! And there are many harder-working and worse-paid people.
"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard
by Norsktroll on Sep 30, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You actually apply different standards of common courtesy based on fiscal earnings?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 30, 2009 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, your right. Because he makes millions of dollars
he has this invisible shield that protects him for people attacking him.
That’s the weakest argument.
since when does making money mean it doesn’t hurt to be called stupid?
by bustabucket on Sep 30, 2009 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually $3.6M per Storyteller
But if you don’t make $3.6M per year and call someone who does stupid what does that make you?
Answer: Being judgmental?
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Sep 30, 2009 7:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Travis is a solid guy who dosent deserve the diss he gets
the worse thing you can say about him is he has slower than average reflex’s his defensive problems[and they are real] are not from lack of hustle
by southern oregon on Sep 29, 2009 5:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't going to click on this post, just because I thougt it'd be more mindless Travis-bashing
Nice to know that there’s still some room for a rational discussion.
by Corvid on Sep 29, 2009 8:55 PM PDT reply actions 3 recs
So's your face!
Er. Um.
Never mind.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 5:56 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Now people are calling Travis "mindless" -- go get him, Annie!!!
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Oct 4, 2009 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Corvid is a her
"The match in Los Angeles is a good opportunity to begin to demonstrate that we want to make war." Rudy Fernández (translated)
by G_dubs on Oct 5, 2009 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get really tired of people bashing Travis.
The idea of always having to have a scapegoat is just dumb to me. Travis does more good for this team than he does bad. You can’t expect superstardom out of every single player. If and when Travis leaves I wonder who will take his place as the person responsible for the Blazers losing.
Travis is a lot smarter than people think. It’s one thing to sit at a computer and break down a game and point out everything that went wrong. It’s one thing to block some 50 year old guy’s imitation sky hook at the Y and think you’re a baller. It’s another to perform great every night against the best players in the world. Travis has plenty of good nights, right now he’s a bench player. A very good one… 6th man candidate good. But if you’re blaming a loss on a single bench player then you’re looking at this TEAM game the wrong way.
Most of the anti-Travis people will miss him when he’s gone. A lot of teams would gladly take Outlaw’s scoring off the bench.
People especially need to stop going after him cause of what he says on Twitter. That’s just sad.
I for one am open to Travis trades but in no way WANT to see him gone. I love the guy and would gladly have him as a life long Blazer.
by Bskey on Sep 29, 2009 9:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Before Travis, it was Sergio
Before that, Jarrett.
Before that, zaching Zach.
Next, it will be Bayless or Blake.
For the L@kers, it is Odom.
Perhaps fans got into a habit of complaining about Zach for perfectly understandable reasons, and just couldn’t stop.
Or perhaps they are small people who make themselves feel bigger by proclaiming loudly how dumb/slow/mindless a player is. They know anyone will laugh if they say they can shoot better, pass better, rebound better, than the guys on the floor, even when the guys on the floor miss a shot or make a bad pass or fail to box out. But when the guy on the floor makes a mental error, they can claim to do that better. No, not everyone who criticizes Travis and his mental errors is like this, but some are.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 6:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Possibly that's because Sergio was horrible, Zach was a huge d-bag, and Bayless hasn't progressed like a lottery pick should
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Jack was inconsistent...
…just like someone else I know.
Pubert Jones > Hedo
by rockingharder on Sep 30, 2009 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fans need a scapegoat to let their anger out on
Travis is the easy target along with Steve Blake.
"What I'm not looking for is, uh, some big overgrown monster that's always thinkin' about food."
by Starvin' Marvin on Sep 29, 2009 10:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Why are there so many shaved heads in Oregon?
by tominhawaii on Oct 3, 2009 5:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We don't have to dry our heads in the rain
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Oct 3, 2009 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because wet hair doesn't look as good
when the alternative is the steam-head effect once you get inside a nice, warm building.
by Garces on Oct 4, 2009 2:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Making fun of Travis was like listening to Britney Spears.
You just wanted to fit in!
Who knew the joke was one you?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 29, 2009 11:20 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
one on
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 29, 2009 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually pointing out Travis's flaws makes you a villian around here
I would submit that glossing over Travis’s flaws is actually the Flavor of the Month
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a strange dynamic, to be sure
I think the female fans on the blog are Travis friendly, hence the white knights of the internet rush to defend them/Trav.
On the other hand, he’s a God awful defender who makes terrible decisions on the basketball court. But, sure, we’re just making fun of him because he has an accent.
by Garces on Oct 3, 2009 6:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, you make fun of him because you're small minded
and, as apparent from that comment, you’re a misogynist.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Oct 3, 2009 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, and if you pick on Fair Annie again, I'm gonna run you through with a 12 foot lance...
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Oct 4, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My hero! :0
"I'm not sure SB Nation is big enough for your ego." Garces to annthefan.
" Hahahahhahahahahahhhhhahhha!!!!!!!
I think I’ll make that my new signature. I’m such an uppity woman!" annthefan to Garces
by annthefan on Oct 4, 2009 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please carry my scented hanky on your quest.
"I'm not sure SB Nation is big enough for your ego." Garces to annthefan.
" Hahahahhahahahahahhhhhahhha!!!!!!!
I think I’ll make that my new signature. I’m such an uppity woman!" annthefan to Garces
by annthefan on Oct 4, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've already got one, you see -- itsa verrry nice-a!
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Oct 4, 2009 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Oct 4, 2009 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
What are you doing there behind that rock?
Must be difficult with all that armor on.
"I'm not sure SB Nation is big enough for your ego." Garces to annthefan.
" Hahahahhahahahahahhhhhahhha!!!!!!!
I think I’ll make that my new signature. I’m such an uppity woman!" annthefan to Garces
by annthefan on Oct 4, 2009 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're gonna get me in trouble with the obvious Big Lance joke...
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Oct 4, 2009 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You've seen "The Holy Grail," yes?
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Oct 4, 2009 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah. Yeeeeaaaars ago.
"I'm not sure SB Nation is big enough for your ego." Garces to annthefan.
" Hahahahhahahahahahhhhhahhha!!!!!!!
I think I’ll make that my new signature. I’m such an uppity woman!" annthefan to Garces
by annthefan on Oct 4, 2009 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is exactly the point I was making previously.
Thanks, guys.
by Garces on Oct 4, 2009 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like Ann, I was offended by this comment
The notion that the women on this site need white knights to rush in to defend them is sexist, and the notion that the guys here are defending Travis for chivalrous reasons is absolutely absurd.
I’m not sure I’m any more “Travis friendly” than a lot of people here. Norsktroll — not a female, by the way — nailed my thoughts so eloquently (as he often does) that I didn’t feel the need to chime in. I don’t have a problem with people pointing out the flaws in his game, but the conversation always nosedives into emotionally-charged criticism of Travis the person, not Travis the player. I’d rather read analysis than bickering, and I’d like everyone on the team to be treated fairly. Is it “female” to want those things? No way.
by Corvid on Oct 3, 2009 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, that's silly
Isn’t it more likely that many male BE denizens just aren’t fans of Trout-bashing? I’ve called for the guy to be traded because of his failure to box out, his often-poor decision-making, etc. But I don’t like when it gets personal; by all accounts, Trout is a great guy.
Weird take, Garces.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Oct 3, 2009 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's benighted. Look it up.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Oct 3, 2009 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Welcome to the internet.
Are you new here?
by Garces on Oct 4, 2009 2:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow. Good job. I'm whelmed.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Oct 4, 2009 8:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure SB Nation is big enough for your ego.
by Garces on Oct 4, 2009 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hahahahhahahahahahhhhhahhha!!!!!!!
I think I’ll make that my new signature. I’m such an uppity woman!
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Oct 4, 2009 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not legitimate, it's ignorant
And you’re a troll.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 4, 2009 9:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, I'm wrong
I just looked at your profile and some of your posts, and you aren’t a troll.
You’re just acting like one in this thread. Drop the troll mask and act like a human being again.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 4, 2009 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
White knight alert.
Sorry, pal, I call them as I see them.
by Garces on Oct 4, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And again, a case of narrow, clouded vision.
You should have that seen to.
"I'm not sure SB Nation is big enough for your ego." Garces to annthefan.
" Hahahahhahahahahahhhhhahhha!!!!!!!
I think I’ll make that my new signature. I’m such an uppity woman!" annthefan to Garces
by annthefan on Oct 4, 2009 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It so furthers discussion
when you assume everyone who disagrees with you has ulterior motives.
Fact is, I call them as I see them, too.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 5, 2009 3:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The lines between personal and professional criticism
are all fuzzy nowadays. It’s one of the most challenging conversational quagmires to wade through.
Sometimes you have people who think that just because a guy doesn’t always make the right play and also isn’t facile with the media (either by choice or by virtue of personality) he must be dumb. That doesn’t hold water. I’m sure NBA players run the spectrum of mental acuity from quite high to quite low. But in basketball terms all of these guys are functional geniuses compared to any of us. We might be able to diagram a better option than a particular player executed on a given play but were we to get out on the court the slowest, least perceptive NBA player would destroy 99.99% of us even if we executed perfectly. The ability to play the game should at least be respected. Obviously we should remember that these guys are human beings with lives beyond basketball as well. Our job performance and work habits do indicate something about us but they’re not the whole story. Brilliant people make mistakes at work too, especially when those mistakes are detail-oriented. Didn’t Einstein used to forget to put on pants every once in a while?
Sometimes you have people who consider any criticism as personal. If somebody comments that Player X failed to get around a screen or Player Y might have considerable trade value it’s tantamount to insulting somebody’s mother. For a brief period the word “hater” was en vogue around here and I cringed every single time I read valid, reasoned arguments dismissed that way. This is just as insulting and misguided in its own way as the other. Criticism is an indispensable plank of good analysis. Observing something about a player on the basketball court is not the same as insulting that player personally.
The world would be a lot nicer if we could all keep the dividing lines clear.
—Dave
by Dave on Sep 30, 2009 1:03 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
As usual Dave well said
There are clear differences between “Outlaw just blew that play” and “Outlaw is an idiot”.
I’ve gotten angry at Roy, Aldridge, Joel and others for messing up too. Roy had his fair share of screw ups last season but you don’t see people calling him dumb.
Outlaw, for his role on this squad he’s one of the best in the league. Come in off the bench, get some scoring done and light a fire under the behinds of the others if need be. People just want perfection out of every player on their team and usually find one player to blame for everything. Then actually start to dislike the guy even if he’s done nothing wrong or screwed up significantly worse than the team’s star at times.
by Bskey on Sep 30, 2009 3:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just out of curiosity, what does this mean?
“light a fire under the behinds of the others if need be.”
If it means what I think it means (leadership) then I can honestly say I have rarely, if ever, seen Travis provide that.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right, he is kind of humble.
The leadership he has provided (that we all have read about) is more behind the scenes. In the locker room & such.
Boy am I glad Travis is stupid enough to get Roy and LaMarcus back onto the same page. What a horrid example of leadership.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 30, 2009 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Behind the scenes? My God man where are you getting your information?
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The newspaper.
Where are you getting yours?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 30, 2009 9:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Internet, obviously
If either of you trusts your source, you might be, well, er, yeah, you know,
…
…
stupid.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It doesn't have to be leadership in a normal sense.
Sometimes when things are stagnant and the starters are not feeling the game players like Outlaw and Rudy can come in and turn it around. A high energy scoring punch can get the rest of the team back into the game, especially a young one like this.
by Bskey on Sep 30, 2009 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd be happy if Outlaw retired a Blazer
I love the kid.
Of course, I have often complained about Outlaw during games. We all can debate the merits of judging one on the nebulous concept of “BBIQ”, but there is such a thing as in-game decision making, focus, and reactions. Outlaw has developed some automatic moves that work very well for him, and he’s been quite slow (even for a prep-to-pro player) to develop other aspects of his game.
He’s slow on rotations, loses focus on defense, can take bad shots, and doesn’t usually see the open man. But, as a scorer off the bench, that is okay. It also means I will go ARRGH, OUTLAW at my TV screen during games. I still love the kid, but will also point out when Outlaw the Player makes a mistake… and it shouldn’t make someone believe I am casting dispersions upon Outlaw the Hu-Man.
The problem is, I know not everyone can make that division. They see Outlaw make a boneheaded play, they assume he is a bonehead in real life. Anyone who listens to his interviews should realize he’s a clever, funny kid. He doesn’t get in trouble, doesn’t have any kids (makes him very smart at the very least), and is best friends with God in sneakers Brandon Roy— Outlaw must be doing something right.
I will always defend Outlaw when people assume he is a dumb person, but I’ll also defend the right to point out Outlaw’s flaws on the court. We all have to learn to keep that separate.
Even hearing him talk about the game, it is clear Outlaw knows WHAT he is supposed to do. Knowing what to do and reacting quickly and doing what you’re supposed to do are different things. I do think, thus far, he has lacked the focus and reaction (maybe the instincts) to get the most out of his athleticism, and it often results in frustrating plays on both ends of the court.
I still love Outlaw, would love for him to be a Blazer for life (but contend that for his own sake he’d get more minutes and MONEY on a team that needed scoring more), and he seems like a great kid. He’s grown up a lot before our eyes over the years, and it’d be hard to imagine him wearing a different jersey. It won’t feel right.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Sep 30, 2009 3:16 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
yeah, I think its very fair to question Outlaw's BBIQ
You know who else has bad BBIQ though? Channing Frye. How else to explain the number of shoots he takes with his foot on the 3 point line?
Why don’t people call Frye dumb? I don’t know which is the bigger factor— that Frye went to college or that Frye doesn’t have a Southern accent.
by jksnake99 on Sep 30, 2009 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another BEIQ failure
You’ll have to work on that. :)
(I kid only because you are one of the smartest participants on this blog.)
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Frye made much more mistakes per minute than Trout
I think him being so good with the media helped a lot, though most still weren’t sad to see him go with how he played.
M—
by Mortimer on Sep 30, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Frye also played half as much as Trout
so there would naturally be more discussion about Travis. I don’t remember too much discussion last year about Ruffin’s flaws.
by Royster on Sep 30, 2009 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The gap between Frye and Trout's minutes is one thing
Using Ruffin as an example is pointless.
Frye often made the wrong pass regularly in somewhat regular minutes, or the dumb foul, or the dumb shot. No one harped on him having a low BBIQ. Why? I dunno. I suspect it’s a combo of he hasn’t been on the team long, he deals with the media as good as any athlete, and like you point out he didn’t play a grip.
But to me, he did the same things as Outlaw did in both seasons Frye was a Blazer. I think most agree he seems like a smart dude off the court, but he sure often played like a bonehead.
Mort
by Mortimer on Sep 30, 2009 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, Frye was also clearly much worse than Trout
and played a much lesser role on the team so it’s completely reasonable that he’d come in for less criticism. Frye’s failings could be written of that he was just a bad player overall. With Travis, it was pretty clear the past two years that he was a talented offensive player and had more of the offense run through him, so there must have been “something else”.
The point about Ruffin was just meant as an extreme. The less a guy plays, the less criticism/praise he’ll receive because he has less of an impact on the game. Outlaw’s play impacted a lot more games than Frye’s did, so people are going to dsicuss it more. Ruffin’s play impacted no games, so it was never discussed.
by Royster on Sep 30, 2009 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For me
I think it’s because he’d only be on the court five minutes. You might miss some things or forget quickly. When you see a guy for 30 minutes, you’re less likely to forget. When it’s at the end of game, I think you’re even more likely to remember.
I think the comment that Frye was a media darling does have some legitimacy too. After all, my memories of Frye are from interviews… not game plays (except a couple of missed shots that I can recall).
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
by ratbastird on Sep 30, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, my memories of Frye
Are from the 2007-8 season when he stepped up when Joel got injured and did a great job
by DonkeyShins on Sep 30, 2009 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, we had high hopes for Channing last year at this time
he was going to be the PF that played alongside Oden/Przy and helped “spread the floor” etc. Then Frye hurt his ankle in camp and never got his confidence (and job) back. He’ll do fine in PHX, but the Suns probably won’t reach the playoffs. The Blazer’s roster won’t miss him, even though the backup PF/C positions haven’t been significantly upgraded, yet
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 30, 2009 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
disagree
I think next season I will undertake a project and keep track of all the mistakes Travis makes that most of the other players on the team do not make.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is the wrong reason to watch Blazers games
It’s like those fanposts last year complaining about Oden’s body language on the bench. Why the hell were they watching the bench and not the game?
by tominhawaii on Sep 30, 2009 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I started doing that.
I learned a few things:
*Travis makes a lot of mistakes out there. A LOT of mistakes.
*If you fixate on what any one player does, you’ll find mistakes. I started watching other players closely for the sake of argument, and found that while I didn’t think they made as many mistakes as Travis, they seemed to make more when I focused on them.
*Pointing out every time that Travis makes a bonehead mistake is a good way to make people really angry during Gameday threads.
Pubert Jones > Hedo
by rockingharder on Sep 30, 2009 9:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That, in itself, makes you unfit to make the judgement call.
I’m not saying it isn’t fun for you. I’m not saying it makes you a bad Blazer fan.
And I’m happy you are a member of Blazersedge because you have good stuff to say.
Of course, the but is that your quite clearly an anti-Travis zealot. Not really the guy to go to for a realistic view on things (related to travis).
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 30, 2009 9:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know who else constantly steps on the 3 point line? Jason Kidd. And he is one of the best passers and defenders among point guards ever. Still he has bad situational awareness when it comes to this detail.
"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard
by Norsktroll on Sep 30, 2009 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think there are any dividing lines Dave.
I do think that people shouldn’t post stuff about Outlaw that they wouldn’t say to his face. I submit that a lot of stuff that gets posted here would not be said directly to Travis. – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 30, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
rofl
Is this the macho-man post? Figured there’d be at least one. I would love to say things to Travis’s face so that he would knock me out like a tough guy. Then I could sue and live happily ever after.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
whatever works for you, dude.
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 30, 2009 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you just call Elgin macho?
That’s funny. No offense Elgin.
My team went to the playoffs in my first year.
by pxilpooshr on Sep 30, 2009 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is very masculine. I like that in a man. ;-)
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You wouldn't like me.
I’m like a waif in the wind.
My team went to the playoffs in my first year.
by pxilpooshr on Sep 30, 2009 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They aren't mutually exclusive. :-)
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
She likes Travis
and he’s skinny.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And I'm dumb too! Woo hoo!
oh… oops.
My team went to the playoffs in my first year.
by pxilpooshr on Sep 30, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're unable to utter speech? I'm sorry.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
I’m also illiterate.
My team went to the playoffs in my first year.
by pxilpooshr on Sep 30, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're smarter than that, Leeroy
It’s not about whether you would say it and he would knock you down. It’s about whether common decency and politeness would stop you from saying it to his face.
You shouldn’t say things on a blog if they violate common decency and politeness, any more than you would say them in person.
And when someone violates that, they don’t really demean the person they are talking about — they demean themselves.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Wait, I thought the argument was that Travis was reading these forums and feeling hurt
I’d say anything I say here to Travis’s face. Fact. Unfortunately I will never meet Travis in person so I will say those same things here.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, so you are ill-mannered
It’s a shame, your insight would be better received if it weren’t so.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:05 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Travis supporter right here.
just saying.
209 H.
by sctdnkl on Sep 30, 2009 4:23 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
It's possible Travis is a genius in real life, but I've seen him make some of the dumbest decisions humanly possible on the court
That’s all I got. Travis is nice I’m sure. Unfortunately I’ve (we’ve) given Travis five summers already to impress us.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 6:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
And honestly, let's stop categorizing those of us pointing out the obvious as 'haters' or whatever
That gets tired just as quickly as the ‘hating’ itself.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 6:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
categorizing haters
well if it quacks its a duck…. and saying
I’ve seen him make some of the dumbest decisions humanly possible on the court
is a great example of confirmation bias.
There are some people who aren’t smart
by bow4meow on Sep 30, 2009 7:15 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
He makes terrible decisions dude, wake up and smell the coffee?
Facts are not hurtful
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you can't tell the difference
between “he makes terrible decisions sometimes” and “he makes some of the dumbest decisions humanly possible”, then you probably need to wake up and smell the coffee.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol they are the same thing
I don’t subscribe to the feely-good school of truth. I call it like I see it.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too bad your vision is so clouded and narrow.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 30, 2009 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Leeroy, do you read anything I write?
If so, you know that I’m willing to “call it like I see it”, too. You don’t have to stoop to personal insult to do that. And you know it, and you know those two are not the same thing.
Here, I’ll demonstrate. “Some of your comments on this thread are insulting and demeaning to yourself and this site.”
“You are the worst jerk I’ve ever seen on Blazersedge.”
The first is true. The second stoops to personal insult, is of no value, and in fact is not true.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Unfortunately I’ve (we’ve) given Travis five summers already to impress us.
This is where I’m at, as well. I know that Outlaw is a great kid, that’s not the point (to me) The point is “who best helps the team win games, and especially playoff series?” That’s not going to be Travis, and (following his performance during the Rocket’s series) most of us know why. Yes, he can make game-winning shots, and that’s wonderful when it happens. But there’s more to winning games then throwing in a prayer to beat the buzzer. If Outaw (and rest of his teammates) had taken care of business during the other 47 minutes of the game, perhaps the Blazers wouldn’t have been in such a “desperate” situation
Nate said the team is now in “Phase 2” No more rebuilding, it’s time to contend. The team needs every player to focus and minimize mistakes and maximize every possession. If Travis shows he can pay attention to the little details then he’ll play. But I’m not optimistic that he will, based on 5+ years of observation. Then there’s the “playing time issue during a year that his contract is expiring” do I even need to elaborate on the extra “pressure” that adds to a player’s mind?
Finally, I return to this point. Nate and KP pursued Hedo and Millsap, back in July. There were rumors that if Utah has decided not to match Millsap’s offer that there was deal in place to trade Outlaw to Memphis. It didn’t happen, but the Blazers were (allegedly) considering it. For the Hedo offer to even be made, you have to know that Roy was consulted and “signed off” on the idea, even though “adding Turk” would’ve likely signalled the imminent departure of Travis.
Nobody seems to want to talk about this now, but I’m sure TO hasn’t forgotten it. The NBA is a business, and what “the bloggers” may be saying means very little, when it’s compared to your own team looking to (allegedly) replace you, during the offseason. Outlaw is handling it pretty well, as we might expect. But I wouldn’t blame him if he started looking towards “greener pastures” in other NBA cities, where more PT, shots, and $$$ will be available, next July
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 30, 2009 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't remember the haters
whining when Travis was hitting big baskets, rebounding and blocking shots last season. I’ve rewatched a few of the Blazers’ big games from last year, and Travis often came up as a big-game player. For example:
Portland 101, Houston 99
Travis: 14 pts, 13 reb, 2 BS, 1 steal.
(Oops, big defensive numbers. Must be a misprint because we know Travis doesn’t play defense.)
Portland 11, LAL 94
Travis: 22 pts on 6-11 including 3-5 3-pointers.
(Those 3’s were daggers to the L*kers. The crowd was going absolutely nuts when he hit those.)
My point is, all the complainers are being fair-weather friends. Were you booing Travis when he was filling up the basket and swatting shots? No, you were cheering like crazy. Now in the cold light of off-season you want to gripe about him not being Larry Bird and Shane Battier put together. In reality, all he’s done is play hard and be our #3 scorer, an almost unstoppable shooter, and constantly willing to improve. He won games for us last year. He is a … great … Blazer.
I’m not saying he won’t be traded or something, and that’s fine if that’s how it works out, but jeez, give him a little credit for being really good at a lot of the things he does. Keep on truckin’, Travis.
by Kaboomm on Sep 30, 2009 10:21 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
2 games out of 82?
Yeesh
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And yes I was booing Travis because unlike all the non-Comcast subscrigbers who only saw the highlights, I watched the entire game and saw all the mistakes
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
with your anti-Outlaw shades on.
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 30, 2009 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
come on, Elgin
Leeroy’s take on Outlaw’s game is perfectly legitimate. By most advanced metrics he’s a below average player. PER is the only one I know of that says he’s above average (and only just barely).
by jksnake99 on Sep 30, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and most of those don't even adequately account for his mistakes on defense.
by jksnake99 on Sep 30, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
His mistakes on defense/rebounding aren't shown on the wrap-up show
I think its fascinating that my only statement has been that I watched nearly every game on TV last season and saw Outlaw make a lot of mistakes… and that statement drives so many people crazy.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's not true.
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 30, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It IS true.
As much as people criticize him for watching the game with anti-Travis goggles on, the opposite label can be slapped on the critics.
It’s a give and take.
by Garces on Oct 3, 2009 6:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really, I would love for Outlaw to be the player we want him to be
I just have the ability to admit that he’s not
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can dislike a guy as a player but still hope he's successful.
I’ve never been an Outlaw apologist, but I’m not going to BS you by saying I’m not thankful when he his a game winning bucket. Your argument would be that an Outlaw “hater” would rather see the Blazers lose directly at the expense of Outlaw rather than see the team win due to a good play by Outlaw… which is ludicrous.
"Ain't nothin' in this world for free."
by Arby on Sep 30, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Personally attack Hollinger for awhile ;)
He predicts Outlaw #21 among SF in PER next season.
Clearly a Travis Outlaw hater
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 11:33 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/rankings?pos=5
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's pretty dang good for a reserve
Of course, as I mentioned, PER is a metric that generally overrates player like Outlaw— inefficient shooters with relatively high usage and poor defenders.
Still though, Outlaw is a fine player if used well… I just really hope he’s not playing more minutes than Batum next year.
by jksnake99 on Sep 30, 2009 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Outlaw is fine as a back-up or third stringer
Bout 15 minutes a game somewhere in the middle. Having him in at the end of games is death. And yes I know he hit a couple of game-winners last season. I stand by the statement.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
if you are behind, Travis is a good guy to have in for the 4th quarter
If I’m down by 1 with one last possession, he’d be in my lineup.
He wouldn’t be in my lineup if its tied with 6 minutes left, though.
by jksnake99 on Sep 30, 2009 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree with that, I don't want him in a close game
Down by ten in the fourth quarter, sure.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's got icewater in his veins
at the end of the game. He doesn’t choke, and he can get his own shot. And he can knock down the corner 3, so they dare not leave him, which gives Brandon more room.
Even if Travis only gets 10 mpg, you want him in down 1 on the last possession. Nate is smarter than you, and he always used Travis.
Up 1, either with or without the ball? Maybe not. Down 1, every time.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
his 4th quarter offense has been outstanding the last two years
by jksnake99 on Sep 30, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again you are so quick to push all of his rebounding, defense, passing mistakes to the side because he can hit a jumper
I don’t understand this mentality coming from otherwise intelligent BE regulars. What is it about Travis that makes you all so defensive?
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Travis hits a late game jumper then fails to block out his man for a layin, how valuable is Travis?
This happened MULTIPLE times last season.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think I was defensive
I was stating the reason that I would have him in if I was tied or trailing by one basket and had the ball for the final possession. I already stated I wouldn’t have him in for a defensive possession in a tight game, and in a close game with 5 minutes left I would prefer Batum be in.
by jksnake99 on Sep 30, 2009 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again you are so quick to discard what Travis does well
I don’t understand this mentality coming from an otherwise intelligent BE regular. What is it about Travis that makes you lose your head?
jksnake outlined a particular situation where Travis has proven extremely valuable, and any coach would use him. Your dislike for Travis so blinds you that you can’t even take the time to accurately read what he said, and so you argue against a straw man.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe Outlaw and Roy had a running contest
and travis was pretty close with the game winners.
I have to agree with jks comment here.
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
by ratbastird on Sep 30, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
look at who's right around Travis on that list
Grant Hill and Tayshawn Prince.
Looks like Travis is doing pretty well!
by Blazin' on Sep 30, 2009 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hollinger…predicts Outlaw #21 among SF in PER next season.
This kind of national ranking never hurts a player’s eventual trade value, if the other GMs are paying close attention to John H. like KP does
but the real trick will be for Travis to get much time on the floor as a “SF” this year, at least in Portland
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 30, 2009 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe he and Roy had a contest
and travis was pretty close with the game winners.
I have to agree with jks comment here.
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
by ratbastird on Sep 30, 2009 12:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Wasn't that rather the "Chalupa Man" contest, i.e. the player who most often put the team above 100 points?
"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard
by Norsktroll on Sep 30, 2009 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even that being the case
Here’s the list of game winning shots throughout the league
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Sep 30, 2009 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Steve Francis and Ricky Davis are extremely valuable accoirding to that stat
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
its across 5 1/2 years
And Davis didn’t have a great percentage.
But Francis its true does look pretty good in this stat. Probably partly why he got his contract, that and his 18/5.5/6 career averages. Though he did play 3 extra years to get those numbers, compared to Roy.
Extremely valuable I think is stretching it, unless you want to include you know other players like Roy and Outlaw in that extremely valuable category.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Sep 30, 2009 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Check out the percentages
Travis is 6/7. That’s mildly insane, especially when you look at the fact that a lot of those shots haven’t been easy. Some have just been out and out Travis specials, the ones that you say, “NO, PLEASE TRAVIS!” and then it goes in.
For some reason, he makes almost all of them with the game on the line. Amazing.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Brandon is only 7-19 in those situations
And we never say, " NO, PLEASE BRANDON!". Obviously his performance the rest of the game is why, but it still is fairly telling.
"I saw him in the face" Sergio's quote on the latest alley-oop to Rudy.
by blazermaniac32 on Sep 30, 2009 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really
We say, “NO, PLEASE TRAVIS!” because he puts up shots that ordinary mortals should never take because they won’t make them.
But Super-Trout makes them.
With Travis, there is no such thing as an off-balance jumper.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Sep 30, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I will give you that his % is out of this world
I would call it almost flukey. It would be intersesting to see the leaders in this stat for the previous season or two.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And that's why he belongs in the game in this situation
Notice that he also has zero turnovers in this situation.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ricky Davis
Always gave me the impression that he was going to jump through the screen, punch me in the stomach, steal my girlfriend and dump my popcorn on my lap.
by Garces on Oct 3, 2009 6:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anyway, was an interesting thread I will leave you all with this:
#25
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 30, 2009 3:16 PM PDT reply actions 6 recs
rec
My team went to the playoffs in my first year.
by pxilpooshr on Sep 30, 2009 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
Gets a rec from me, too
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not from me. He sullies the #25 and I never gave him permission to use it.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Oct 1, 2009 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
An Easy Way to Tell..
If Travis is dumb.. If he was actually dumb, Brandon Roy would never be one of his best friends in the world. Brandon is seriously intelligent and folks that are that bright don’t claim the chronically stupid as close friends. Period. Look around you, it just doesn’t happen, like attracts like. Both good people, both pretty intelligent, that’s what I see.
Now his BBIQ might be a completely different story..
'do it, do it, do it 'til you're satisfied!' - brian wheeler
by blazersunited on Sep 30, 2009 9:06 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Maybe Brandon likes a dumb guy so he looks smart
sort of like how the hot chick pals around with a pig so she looks better. not saying that is the case here, just saying its possible ;)
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Oct 1, 2009 8:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he is dumb.
And I like his game. He certainly carried us through a few times.
I do question his taste in cars though.
An Oregonian in Texas.
by NoiseMekanik on Sep 30, 2009 9:59 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Most everything has been said here but a couple of additional points
During the season most seemed to agree that Travis was best at PF because it caused such mismatches. But in the playoffs Travis played nearly all of his minutes (I estimate 77%) at small forward. The Rockets happen to have two small forwards who are NBA All-Defensive Team players. Small wonder Travis struggled. The real problem was Batum played 45% fewer minutes than he did in the regular season. Since Batum actually shot better in the playoffs I assume it was his inability to guard Batter or Artest who are much heavier SFs. It underlies the importance of Martell’s return.
I appreciate the purpose of this post and the many contributions from others.
The impression I leave from this thread mirrors what I get fron BE as a whole: there are many passionate fans here, mostly reasonable and considerate. There are always a few who struggle with that majority style. There is room for them here as well.
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Sep 30, 2009 11:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I assume it was his inability to guard Batter or Artest who are much heavier SFs. It underlies the importance of Martell’s return.
Once again, you’re correct. Nate tried Batum to start the game, but Adelman made sure Artest got the ball down low against Nic and abused him. Brandon also had trouble guarding Ron-Ron. Travis was marginally better, but Outlaw didn’t provide the “3rd scoring option” that he had been, during the regular season. So in the final game, Nate tried Rudy in the starting lineup. That didn’t work, either
having Webster around would’ve helped Portland match-up better with the Rockets, last April. But having better PG play and a tougher backup PF/C than Frye might’ve helped out even more
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 12:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even with all that
what it really comes down to is the deer froze in the headlights in that opening game. It was “first game in the playoffs” syndrome, and even with all those factors, if we had come to play from the start of game one, we’d have won with four home-court wins.
All those things could have helped us overcome it, but we choked, and didn’t bring the same defensive intensity to game one that we’d been bringing when we were blowing teams out. We can blame everything, but the biggest culprit was just inexperience.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 12:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
game 1 was bad, but it wasn't the end of the series
the baby-Blazers gained experience from game to game in that series, and the pivotal game (to me) was #4. They had Houston down by 10 in the 4th quarter and got outscrapped for rebounds (11-2) and lost by a point. You can call that a lack of experience, but I’d say they needed to add more mental toughness and physicality to the front line
KP said the same thing, in May-June. Has he added those elements to the roster? Miller and Howard shoud help. Is there room for more? There’s always room for more, and some of it will come from the existing players (“organic growth”) Will Outlaw be one of those players? There’s the rub
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
We almost got back in it. But game one was not the team that played the prior 20 games, and if it had been, we win that series.
There are lots of things that could have been different and we win that series.
No choke in game one? Check.
Better play from Blake? Check.
Better play from Travis? Check.
Better play from Rudy? Check.
Better play from Nic? Check.
Better rebounding in the 4th of #4? Check.
Better backup PG? Check.
We get any of those in game four and we would have had Houston down by more than 10. There are lots of things that could have made the difference. Such is life with a good but young team.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 1, 2009 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
game one was not the team that played the prior 20 games
Portland could have come out without the “jitters” in game 1 and still lost, Yao was on fire and Hoston was motivated to not lose another 1st round series. If the Blazers had played better, game 1 might’ve been closer down the stretch, but still a L for the Blazers. The 2 teams were pretty evenly matched, but a healthy Yao pushed the rebounding advantage in the Rocket’s favor, because Joel/Greg had to account for Ming and the Blazer forwards didn’t pick up the slack.
Portland’s gaudy regular season rebounding stats meant nothing in the playoffs, so to point at those stats now as a reason why “everything will be fine” with Outlaw playing the backup 4 is shortsighted, IMO
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 1, 2009 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You make a good point
Portland had 15 OR in game one to Houston’s 8. But Portland had 15 defensive rebounds to Houston’s 36. Part of that is the 3G% differences – Portland shot 1 for 11 while Houston shot 8 for 21. For the series Portland averaged 10 OR and 26.8 DR down from 12.6 OR and 28.4 DR for the season. Jitters should not account for rebounding. As Brandon says – they were not tough enough.
But I do think that experience is what will drive them forward this year to be much tougher across the board. A backup PF who plays 8 minutes would not have changed the equation enough to change the outcome. LMA played over 40 in every playoff game but the blowouts. Of course with a good backup he might have rested more but he was one of two effective players so he had to play more.
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Oct 2, 2009 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's the little things
A backup PF who plays 8 minutes would not have changed the equation enough to change the outcome
In the 4th quarter, one defensive rebound that prevented a second-chance basket by a Houston player could’ve made the difference between winning and losing that game/series.
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 2, 2009 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where that difference mattered in the 4th quarter would a backup PF even be in the game?
It seemed like Nate preferred offense to defense in the crunch time (rebounding wise) as he player LMA at center and Travis at PF. Both needed double teams to stop.
I am not arguing against another backup PF. I am suggesting that the differential between a banger and a finesse player seems to be defense over offense and the best of choices would be both but that would be someone who starts and is not available (or would be happy) in Portland. Our best chance for that is to draft and develop one. Cunningham and Pendergraph might surprise by the end of the year.
Bill Parcells had a saying about players that he is “just a guy”. He meant that an average skilled player is not going to win championships and he looked for at least one dominant skill in every player.
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Oct 3, 2009 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
bench rotation
Typically, not all of the starters are in the game at the beginning of the 4thquarter, and that’s when the tide turned in game 4. By the time Nate rushed his starters back in the game, the cushion htye had worked so hard to gain in the 3rd quarter was gone
I have high hopes for Dante, he has a lot of the same skills as Outlaw and already has a better grasp on the fundamentals. But neither rookie is going to be ready to contribute in the postseason, and that’s when the games mean the most. Next year, I suspect Outlaw will be playing elsewhere and Cinningham will be filling that 4-3 backup role.
But what about this year? Shouldn’t the Blazers try to improve the toughness on their playoff roster so they don’t suffer the same fate as last year? (At times I think the fans and front office didn’t learn a thing from the Houston series) For all the “talk” about improving the physicality of the frontcourt, all KP has done (so far) is to draft a couple of forwards in the 2nd round and replace Channing Frye wth Juwan Howard. Am I supposed to sit back and hope that LMA, Greg and Joel stay healthy and never get into serious foul trouble in a big game?
What? Me worry?
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 4, 2009 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Travis is one of the worst defenders I've seen in a long, long time.
But yeah, he’s cute, he hits one or two huge shots a season, and he jumps high. He’s my friend’s girlfriend’s favorite player because he’s cute. I can only assume this thread is just her posting under pseudonyms over and over again.
Travis the person is fine. He seems like a good dude. I’d probably high five him if we were in a crowded bar watching a game and he was at the next table. Though I definitely see him as the person who accidentally mistakes the red light for a stop sign from time to time.
Last point: I saw last season where people were against trading Outlaw because he and Brandon apparently have sleep overs and make s’mores and go jogging together in the morning. I find this insulting to Brandon Roy as a professional. To think maybe the greatest Blazer competitor ever would let his game crumble because the guy he watches Desperate Housewives with has moved on to another town is…laughable.
by Garces on Oct 3, 2009 6:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Nate must be your friend's girlfriend
since he keeps playing Travis.
This kind of criticism is inane. Travis does some things well, and some things poorly. To talk as if he has no value is simply trolling.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 3, 2009 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He has negative value on this team
When taking minutes from either Martell or Nic.
by Garces on Oct 3, 2009 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Your observations are puzzling as if you are not familiar with Travis at all or BE
and your assertions that Travis has negative value or is taking minutes away from Martell or Nic seem to ignore who Nate is. The minutes are determined by play on the court. Your assertion claims a level of expertise and experience that exceeds KP, Tom Penn, Nate, Dean, Calib, et all.. This, when viewed objectively, is exactly the sort of claim that is posted on other blogs but not so much on BE. Here we do strive to be respectful and cite our references to support our opinions. I do hope you can assimilate that difference. I agree with jscot.
Travis: "His length is unbelievable. He's long, it feels like he gets his go-go-gadget arm out there and gets the ball." Dante Cunningham
by lee3022 on Oct 3, 2009 9:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, Garces, you're actually correct about Travis Outlaw having "negative value on this team."
2008-2009: Net Points Per 100 Possessions (-6.2).
http://www.82games.com/0809/08POR8.HTM#onoff
2007-2008: Net Points Per 100 Possessions (-4.2).
http://www.82games.com/0708/07POR9D.HTM
2006-2007: Net Points Per 100 Possessions (+1.6).
http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR11D.HTM
2005-2006: Net Points Per 100 Possessions (-2.6).
http://www.82games.com/0506/05POR12D.HTM
2004-2005: Net Points Per 100 Possessions (-2.1).
http://www.82games.com/04POR9D.HTM
2003-2004: Small Sample Size.
http://www.82games.com/03POR16D.HTM
Sans the 2006-2007 season, Outlaw’s overall on-court/off-court +/- production — which combines his affect on the team offensively and defensively — was a negative for the Portland Trail Blazers.
Sadly, some folks don’t want to hear the truth. It’s right there in black and white, though, so nobody can avoid it. As it is, the Trail Blazers would be better off at this moment in time with a hard-nosed, defensive-minded banger at the backup power forward spot like, um, Jeff Foster or Nick Collison.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 3, 2009 10:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Collison, please.
I hate the argument that Outlaw is a plus for this team because he’s granted minutes. Completely ridiculous to claim the following:
“Your assertion claims a level of expertise and experience that exceeds KP, Tom Penn, Nate, Dean, Calib, et all”
while trying to back up your argument by…asserting the exact same thing I was just accused of. Comical.
by Garces on Oct 4, 2009 2:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he is of negative value
why was Nate so stupid as to play him?
Why was KP so stupid as to renew his contract for this year?
Oh, you’re smarter than they are. OK. Good to know.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 4, 2009 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uh, yeah.
Great argument. So any player that’s ever played or signed with a team is automatically immune from criticism because fans aren’t a part of the front office and therefore must shut their mouths.
This is wonderful logic.
by Garces on Oct 4, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Straw man
I never said he’s immune from criticism. I never said you should shut your mouth (though you are tempting me greatly, I must say).
I’m dealing with your over the top assertion that he is of negative value.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 5, 2009 3:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're often smart enough to not use a logical fallacy like appeal to authority, jscot.
This time, though, your vacuous, half-witted argument is invalid due to a logical fallacy.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 4, 2009 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's not an appeal to authority
and you should be smart enough to recognize it.
It is citing the opinion of expert witnesses in response to the opinion of a non-expert. When the amateur finds himself in disagreement with the professional experts, maybe he ought to insert a little humility into his assertions.
Unless he wishes to risk combining arrogance with idiocy.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 5, 2009 3:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can call it hubris on my part, but I see it as an appeal to authority by you.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 5, 2009 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Logic lessons from wikipedia
Argument from authority or appeal to authority is a logical fallacy, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative. The most general structure of this argument is:
Source A says that p.
Source A is authoritative.
Therefore, p is true.
This is a fallacy because the truth or falsity of the claim is not necessarily related to the personal qualities of the claimant, and because the premises can be true, and the conclusion false (an authoritative claim can turn out to be false). It is also known as argumentum ad verecundiam (Latin: argument to respect) or ipse dixit (Latin: he himself said it). 1
Hmm. Has jscot committed a logical fallacy here? Fortunately, the article goes on:
On the other hand, arguments from authority are an important part of informal logic. Since we cannot have expert knowledge of many subjects, we often rely on the judgments of those who do. There is no fallacy involved in simply arguing that the assertion made by an authority is true. The fallacy only arises when it is claimed or implied that the authority is infallible in principle and can hence be exempted from criticism.
I do not see that I claimed or implied that the authority is infallible in principle or can be exempted from criticism. In fact, I have frequently denied that.
To acknowledge the expertise of others and rely on their judgment is not “appeal to authority”. You know a thing or two about basketball, and so do I, but neither of us has the expertise they do. So in a matter of judgment, rather than provable fact, their opinion weights more heavily than either of ours. When I find myself in disagreement with their judgment, I tread lightly.
I don’t like Nate McMillan’s offense. I don’t think it maximizes the talent we have on this team. I’ve said so. But I also have to admit that he may be smarter than me, because what he is doing is indisputably effective.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 5, 2009 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Forgot the link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
Now, one could argue that I just made an argument from authority by citing wikipedia. Ultimately, you do have to have some authorities on definitions, at least, or you drift into total discussional anarchy.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 5, 2009 8:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wikipedia isn't an authority figure, so you can cite it with pleasure.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 6, 2009 5:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I, too, am not too fond of Nate McMillan's high/low zone offense, but ...
I give him credit for said offense due to its efficiency and not just ‘cause he’s the coach. If my argument for his offense being sucessful was just “he’s the coach,” then I’d being using an appeal to authority. However, my logically valid claim for his offense being a success — even though I dislike it from an aesthetic viewpoint — is due to its efficiency, which is a fact-based statement.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 6, 2009 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, we reach an understanding
If I had said that Nate is right just because “he’s the coach”, you would be correct that this is an appeal to authority. Fortunately, I didn’t. All I said is that if Garces is right, Nate and KP are stupid.
I wasn’t appealing to authority, I was just pointing out that Garces was implicitly making a claim to greater basketball knowledge than KP and Nate. I didn’t even explicitly pass judgment on that claim, though my sarcasm gives a pretty good indication what I think of it.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 6, 2009 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dumb argument, AK
1) To assess a player’s value based on a single statistic is something which you yourself know to be invalid.
2) To assess a player’s value based on this particular statistic is to ignore the fact that the quality of teammates with which he plays can heavily skew this statistic.
3) One of the loves of your life, Mike Miller, had a negative number in this statistic last year.
4) To assess a player’s value based on this statistic without any kind of evaluation as to whether or not the team would have done better with another player in his place is mindless.
Anyone knows that we were a better team last year than if Travis Outlaw had been injured and out for the season. To say he has negative value is stupid.
To suggest that he has negative value and then turn around and suggest that he should be traded for players like Foster or Collison is self-contradictory. The only way you could trade a player who has negative value for them is if they also have negative value (in which case, please quit banging on about them) or if the opposing GM is stupid.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 4, 2009 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Regarding defense, here's a comparison of Jeff Foster v. Nick Collison v. Travis Outlaw.
Net Points Allowed Per 100 Possessions: Foster (-5.3) > Collison (-1.6) Outlaw (2.0)
Net eFG% Allowed: Foster (-2.2%) > Outlaw (-1.8%) > Collison (-1.0%)
Opponent eFG% @ PF: Foster (49.5%) > Collison (53.6%) > Outlaw (54.6%)
Net Offensive Rebounding Percentage: Foster (3.4%) > Collison (-0.1%) > Outlaw (-1.9%)
Net Defensive Rebounding Percentage: Foster (3.6%) > Collison (2.5%) > Outlaw (-2.5%)
Net Total Rebounding Percentage: Foster (3.5%) > Collison (1.2%) > Outlaw (-2.2%)
Rebounds Per 48 Minutes Difference @ PF: Foster (5.4) > Collison (+2.4) > Outlaw (-0.3)
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 4, 2009 10:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You still fail to address your logical inconsistency
AK’s argument:
1. Travis Outlaw is not worthless, he’s worse than that, he has negative value.
2. Foster and/or Collison are good players, and they are what we need.
3. We should trade Outlaw for Foster and/or Collison.
Presumably, if #1 and #2 are both true, #3 is going to be impossible, unless you propose to get opposing GMs drunk or blackmail them.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 5, 2009 3:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
With your final sentence up there, you've once again used an appeal to authority.
Not one single human being is infallible, regardless of their position in life—even if it’s as a front office executive for some NBA franchise. It, therefore, is possible for a front office exectuive to swindle another front office executive in a trade.
Heck, some Portland fan created the inane “Pritchslap” slogan for that very reason.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 5, 2009 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's silly, AK
That isn’t an appeal to authority. That’s just reality — you don’t expect to be able to trade worse than worthless players for valuable players.
Your position grants Pritchard the same god-like status that the clowns who coined that phrase gave him. You expect him to pull off trades that are stupid for the other team. You virtually DEMAND that he do so.
The only reason you can even suggest that he do so is simply this — you know yourself that Outlaw has more value than is being asserted by you in this thread. He’s a flawed player, but still a valuable weapon to bring off the bench at times. If he weren’t, you wouldn’t be suggesting these trades. You always suggest trades that attempt to be even-handed and balanced, not stupid trades for one party.
So you’re nailed here, and there’s no way out of it. You would never suggest those trades if Outlaw didn’t have value, and you know it. The game’s up.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 5, 2009 8:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I recognize Travis Outlaw has value across the NBA, which shows that ...
even people in authority (i.e., front office executives) make certain mistakes when analyzing the overall contributions of players. All in all, trade value and on-court value are two different things.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Oct 6, 2009 5:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Two points here.
1. People make mistakes. Self-evident.
2. Trade value and on-court value are different things. Also true.
As to #1, it is unfair and inappropriate to criticize a GM if opposing GMs won’t make the mistake you want them to make. To criticize is to assume that those opposing GMs are indeed making that mistake, and that KP is also making it. Both are “facts not in evidence.”
As to #2, on-court value is a component of trade value. The other primary component, in Travis’ case, is the value of an expiring contract, which will increase his value for a team that is looking to dump salary. Thus, you could legitimately argue that Travis is worth more on the trade market than his on-court value — when trading with a team that wants to dump salary.
Do you have any evidence to indicate that either Foster’s or Collison’s team is looking to dump salary?
Do you have any evidence to indicate that either team is over-valuing Travis’ on-court value?
If you place such a low opinion on Travis’ on-court contributions, what evidence do you have that he could be traded for either of the players you want?
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 6, 2009 10:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But Travis is a nice guy and says 'aw shucks'
We love him here
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Oct 5, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Déjà vu.
I came to Bedge in the middle of the Jack v Sergio wars.
Spanish folk saying: dos no pelean si uno no quiere. ( "Two don’t fight, if one doesn’t want to).
Or as you would say: It takes two to tango.
Anoche cuando dormía
soñé, ¡bendita ilusiòn!,
que una colmena tenía
dentro de mi corazòn;
y las doradas abejas
iban fabricando en él,
con las amarguras viejas,
blanca cera y dulce miel.
Antonio Machado.
by amlmart1 on Oct 4, 2009 7:05 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Looked like more of the same from Trav at the fan fest
He rebounded a little better than usual. Other than that, same ol same ol
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Oct 5, 2009 9:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Since that's one of the big weaknesses in his game
that’s a good sign.
He’s going to have a smaller role this year. Rebounding is probably the most important area for him to improve.
As author of Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto), I hereby certify that we will win 62 games in the regular season. Disagree at your peril.
by jscot on Oct 5, 2009 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As the back up small forward,
yes any additional effort Travis displays rebounding will be appreciated.
"The match in Los Angeles is a good opportunity to begin to demonstrate that we want to make war." Rudy Fernández (translated)
by G_dubs on Oct 5, 2009 9:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant power forward. doh.
"The match in Los Angeles is a good opportunity to begin to demonstrate that we want to make war." Rudy Fernández (translated)
by G_dubs on Oct 5, 2009 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
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
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
