Mr. Pritchard, if you're reading this

Please do everything in your power to send Travis Outlaw packing this offseason. I don't care what you get back for him. Any subtraction of Outlaw comes with a net PLUS for this team.

He absolutely FADED and WILTED in what was the biggest series of games for the Blazers in six years.

I'm done with the "freakishly athletic" and "unrealized potential" talk. The guy is one of the most experienced players on the team. He's been here six years, and all he's added to his game is a more realiable perimeter shot, which largely negates his athleticism anyway. He can't finish near the basket on a regular basis. He fades away from, rather than in to, contact, giving the defender the advantage on most occasions. His rebounding averages are atrocious for a player of his size and jumping ability. And he couldn't defend a chair.

Please don't go to Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge to ask them what they think. They are Travis' best friends and will advocate for him staying until the cows come home. They'll put their friendship with him above what's best for the team. I love their loyalty, but sometimes you have to make a decision that upsets a few guys for the betterment of the team.

-Pop

 

I think that with Roy and Aldridge now having tasted the playoffs, and failing, will accept what ever KP thinks is best for the team.

 

I hope you're right, but I remember reading a comment from Brandon from earlier in the series where he basically said that fans should have patience with Outlaw because he's only going to get better.

Bullshit. I don't want to waste Brandon's and LaMarcus' prime years hoping that a six-year veteran will finally realize his potential in year 7, 8, 9 or 10.

-Pop

 

Quit dogging on (playoff clutch) Cliff Robinson, err, Travis Outlaw. Travis really needs to change his mindset regarding contact. LMA is not soft, but TO is.

 

I don't understand this.

You say you don't care what you get back for him? So, what if we got absolutely not back for him? Who would have played in his spot during this playoff series? Batum? Please. Frye? Gross. Ruffin?

LA can't play all game, every game.

 

Travis Outlaw would have gotten us--along with RLEC--that third option that was missing from the Blazers this series. I hope Brandon Roy is happy; he fucked himself with his loyalty to TrOut.

 

You need to fill 15 roster spots. You don't need to get rid of Travis. He is a great utility guy to come off the bench. He will accept what ever role you give him. (More so than most guys) Yes we need to improve the team. But you don't get rid of players for a bad playoff series. I have seen super stars have bad series. Nate will play whoever helps most. If you get someone better than Travis, then Travis slips down on the depth chart. We always need depth and Travis can supply that.

 

This doesn't make sense. Portland isn't relying on Outlaw for their future championship hopes. He's a reserve. His presence on the roster in no way hurts the team, as a reserve. No team in the NBA has 12 guys better than Outlaw.

 

Assuming full health for next season, Martell.

Obviously, I'd expect us to get something for Travis, but at this point I just want him gone.

-Pop

 

I don't mind keeping Travis around, but if he's someone another team covets to land us a good player, I wouldn't hesitate. And I don't think we can rely on him to be our third-best scoring option. He's still a good player, just not the third best player on a team hoping to win a title.

 

I don't think we have to get rid of Trav, but I don't think he should play as much. He is great value for his contract, but too much of a liability playing over 30mpg. Playing him in the mid-20s would be fine with me as the 7th or 8th man off the bench (depending on the Center's fouls). He is also good off the court. So yeah, I think it is on Nate to not have the team focus and depend on Trav as much, but I think he is a really good bench player and got national recognition as one of the better players off the bench in the NBA. He gets too much hate.

But i'd also trade him if he, with others, nets us a really good player. Whatever is best for the team i'm down with.

 

I just tabulated some rudimentary totals.

In games in which Outlaw has played 30+ minutes, we're 13-14 (including 0-2 in the playoffs). So, we're 43-18 in games in which he has played fewer than 30 minutes. These numbers tell me that he's good, but only if used in moderation.

Maybe having Marty and Batum take some of his minutes will alleviate this issue.

 

Six-year veteran Travis Outlaw's numbers for the biggest set of six games in his life:

31.8% FG
25% 3pt
66% FT
9 ppg
3 rpg
0.5 apg

-Pop

 

That's a correlation, but it doesn't tell us about causation. My guess is that the games Outlaw did not play 30+ minutes in were games when other players who could fill his role (primarily Batum and Fernandez) were playing well. The games Outlaw played 30+ were games when neither of those guys were doing much.

Thus, I don't think Outlaw playing 30+ minutes creates losing. I think Outlaw playing 30+ minutes signals that other players on the team aren't playing well. Which would, of course, hurt Portland's chances of winning.

 

Well, Outlaw is limited, which is why he's really not a starter. The point is, if no one else is playing well, what do you do? Outlaw is the next best option...after him, you have what...Frye at small forward?

Outlaw should play as much as he's needed (based on how everyone else is playing) and no more. Ideally, that would be something like 20-25 minutes. But if Batum isn't playing well as the other small forward, and Rudy isn't playing well as the team's best reserve perimeter player, then the next move is to up Outlaw's minutes for that game.

 

Hence the "rudimentary..."

While you are absolutely correct about the lack of causation in my claim, there is also some merit to the fact that Nate uses Outlaw as a crutch, much like he did Jack last year, and also Blake to an extent this year. There have been numerous occasions when Travis has been given a longer leash than guys like Rudy, Batum, or even Oden.

Easy solution: get rid of him, and don't give coach the chance to overplay him. It worked with Jack.

 

of course he was very disappointing in the playoffs, but i'd rather wait another playoff series or two before shipping him off.

did everyone really expect him to light it up against Houston, in his first ever playoff series? guarded by Battier and Artest for many minutes?

some guys need some real playoff time under their belts before they can really get better.

 

This is a stupid argument. One playoff series in his life. Oh OK lets make roster changes based on this.