I can see why Outlaw is the subject of every blazer trade rumor.

In some respects, this whole Travis-vs-Martell argument is silly.

Neither is a good defender. Webster is less of a liability 1-on-1, while Outlaw is perhaps more effective in a zone.

Neither is a good rebounder. Given size and leaping ability, that is more a knock on Outlaw.

Neither is a good ballhandler/playmaker. Given that Webster was once projected as a guard, that is more of a knock on him.

If things continue as the are, all we are arguing about is who will be Bahtoom's back-up! IMHO, the real question is which of the two will produce a better return in the trade market. All things being equal, I would rather hang on to Outlaw...but I suspect that outside of Portland he is the more highly valued commodity.

 

puhleeeze. Outlaw was the threat of the 2nd unit last year and was defended as such on most every shot he took, yet he shot 40% from deep. This year he's at 50% and you're trying to say he's accomplishing this flying under the radar? Get real.

STOMP

 

Batum is awesome. I want him to be our starting SF for the rest of his career. He plays good defense, he rebounds, he plays well with our star guys, and he knocks down open shots as well as anyone on our team. He will only get better. He's the real deal and a keeper. I like Webster and Outlaw too though. Bring Webs off the bench and move Outlaw to the 4. I like Frye too, though. Oh boy. As long as we win, I'll be okay with what we do.

 

Have to agree with that sentiment. It's pretty telling that a rookie can come in and knock off two players that we have been grooming for years. If Martell shoots above his ho-hum career average in FG% after returning, then I think he should stay as the 6th man. But if he's the same old Webster, keep TO since he's an option at PF.

 

During his first and 2nd year and the start of last year before Nate started going with Travis at the end of games - since he was able to show time and again that he can create his own shot when the games were close and there was a need to find someone else (in addition to Brandon) who could score when the opposing team was playing tough D.

Let's face it - at the end of close games you need some of the following attributes:

1. Ability to create for himself - not a Webster specialty - something Travis does well.
2. Ability to handle the ball under pressure - not a Webster specialty - Travis is not great here either but he is better than Webster.
3. Great rebounding - Niether of these guys really distinguish themselves from each-other.
4. Defense - Split again - Webster is a better man-to-man defender, Travis does a better job as a help-defender.
5. Good outside shot when the defense collapses on Brandon/Aldridge/Whoever - Both work well in this capacity - but Travis actually shoots better from the outside than Webster now.

What is there not to understand?

 

unless batum falls apart, its really not close when comparing his game to webster or outlaw.

if batum can get a consistant 3 ball...webster becomes a bench player at best

 

Man I love that we finally have an answer to the Webster or Outlaw question: Batum. And it's not even close as far as I'm concerned.

 

why batum over webster?

doesn't seem to have mood swings.
always makes plays regardless wether his shot is falling.
doesn't sulk.
plays better defense.
is long.

All martell has over batum is a 3pt shot. webster is a "decent defender" but i wll go as far as saying batum is better in 18 games then webster has been his whole career and that is just sad on websters part.



why is batum better then outlaw?

doesnt have a deer in headlight look
actually understand basic basketball fundamentals
doesnt put his head/shoulders down like a running back and take bad shots that end up bricks
plays solid defense rather then an occasional block
doesnt look awkward on the court

Outlaw has shot the 3 ball well but other then that, batum is a better basketball player 18 games in which again either says batum is gonna be a great player or outlaw just doesnt have "it."

 

The only evidence I have is the fact that Nate and his staff, who did see them play all the time - chose not to put him in late in the games. In comparison - they chose to put Travis and they now choose to put Nic in.

The only evidence you have that he can do it is we need to wait and see what he can do this year?

I wish Webster nothing but the best - I hope he will turn to be a great ball handler, a more consistent long-ball shooter and a guy who can create for himself - but history is not on his side so far. Really - I wish no ill to Webster - he is definitely a good guy who says all the right things, never seems to be a distraction and never seems to be unprepared physically. The only thing I have to go about is that the only thing that is going for him as far as becoming an average or better player (something he has not done yet) is his age.

As for why we still need someone who can create when we have Aldridge and Oden in the game? I think that as time passes on we will hopefully need it less - but Oden is not ready offensively, period - and LaMarcus is inconsistent. LaMarcus also, let's be fair - really works well when he gets free on pick and roll or pick and pop situations - he needs someone (Roy, mostly) to set him up for this.

With Travis - even if he is covered when you get him the ball and all else fails - you know he will be able to get a shot off. It's not always the best one - but sometimes you need someone who can take these tough shots and nail them in some kind of regularity. Travis is capable of doing it. Webster never did. I would say that I have a lot more confidence in Nic being able to get them than Webster - he moves very well attacking the basket with the dribble - we mostly see it now in transition - but we have never seen it with Webster. Martell finishes good on a break when he out-runs his defender or soars for a dunk from an alley-opp. Nic can move his body with the dribble to go around the defender.

 

While JJ was prominently featured - Travis was a closer on that team and did very well in that role.

The team was .500 and overachieved because they were able to close so many close games - and the people who won these close games were Roy and Travis. You look at Portland's season statistics and you see that they had a -1 PPG margin of victory per game and were beaten on the boards night in night out - and it is pretty clear that the reason they went as high as .500 was because they were so good at the end of games.

Travis won the Memphis game and the Atlanta game on the last shot, he forced overtime in Toronto and he had other big4th quarter performances that allowed someone else (Roy, usually) to close the deal.

This year, where he was much less prominently featured in the 4th quarter thanks to a much better team success and big margin wins - he still helped us steal the 2nd Kings game with 9 points in the 4th, he still was valuable to seal both come from behind wins against the T-Wolves in the 4th.

As for my evidence as flimsy? We do not know what Webster can do nowadays in a close game in the 4th - because we never see him there - but we have never seen him consistently create for himself in 3 years of play and we have seen the coaching staff going away from him closing the games last year - when the team started showing some real success.

Is it clear evidence? No. Is it flimsy? I do not think so. There must be a reason we have not seen him there and the team over-achieving...

I would rather have someone willing to take some risks than someone shying away from responsibility and willing to step to the plate. If it means we win some games we have no point of winning and losing some games we would lose anyway... I would much rather have someone willing to take these tough shots.

At this point, they should probably be third option, not 4th (Oden is not yet a reliable offensive player and gets stripped too much). I agree that in the future he will probably be our 2nd or 3rd option, but he is not yet.

As for Travis - he has not been playing like he is the primary option at the end of games this year - unless pressed into this situation with the shot-clock running down - so I am not sure really what the argument is. It is clear that the ball is in Roy's hands, he tries to set up himself, LaMarcus or an open shooter (Usually Blake) at the end of games - and if this does not happen - he gives it to Travis for a bail-out shot. This bail-out shot does not always fall - but I am more confident in Travis taking a ridiculous hard to hit shot with the clock running down than Webster. I would say that my feeling is that in this situation we have a 50% of the shot going down rather than a 5% - and that's why I think Travis is important in late game situations.

I have no real issue with Batum in this situation - since he seems to be able to move with the dribble to get himself a better shot. I have no confidence in Webster doing what-so-ever - since he never was able to do it and I fail to see how his team-oriented game translate to a talent he never exhibited before.

 

finally batum is getting starter minutes. he should be in at the end of games over outlaw, no question imo

 

I've posted it before in a Kyle Lowry thread at BBF, but Portland was 16-5 in games decided by 5 or less and in OT; Memphis was 5-15.

Flip those two results in close games and Memphis ends up with a better record than Portland. Saying that Outlaw hasn't shown that he can close out close games and help the team win is absurd IMO.

Without the exceptional record in close games last year, the Blazers would have been well below .500.