I know not everyone agrees with me (what the fuck is wrong with you people!?! ) but I love his game and I think he'd instantly make us a smarter, better basketball team. he doesn't need plays called for him to get his shots, he rebounds well for his position, he's versatile enough to play 2-4 (depending on matchups) he's a pretty good team defender and decent man defender, and he's got "glue guy" written all over him. Having said that I'm not sure I'd part with both Outlaw and Webster in a sign and trade to get him. The problem I see is that even though Batum and Childress both have decent career 3PT%, (37% for Nic and 36% for Childress) neither is what you would call a volume shooter from behind the arc and you wonder if their fairly modest averages would hold up if they were asked to hoist 4+ attempts per game (granted Webster certainly hasn't been a lights out shooter either with his paltry 37% average on 3.4 attempts per game). It's a tough call. Before we knew Batum could be as effective as he was as a 19 year old rookie I would have been all over trading for Chill, but I really do believe deep down that Nic is going to be a fantastic two-way wing in a couple of more years and I think we can get away with a rotation of Nic and Martel for a little while until he fully comes into his own -- in short I don't see the small forward position being as critical as addressing the need at point guard. If the team can sew up a trade to address the point and there is still cap space to bring a veteran banger and possibly do a sign and trade of Travis + Serg to get the rights to Childress then I'd be all over it.
Jesus christ! Makes the Ron Artest incident seem positively tame! Man, I'd love to get Childress on this team.
I am not a fan of any of the players you have moving to Atlanta, but Sergio, Outlaw, Webster and #24 is simply way too much for Josh Childress.
Ummm, yeah. Exactly right. This offseason, Priority numero uno: Obtain a veteran and an upgrade at the point. Or, barring that, at the very least, upgrade the point guard rotation as a unit. 2nd Priority: Backup PF, banger style - preferably a dude that has been around the block and thrived in the playoffs. 3rd Priority: Maximize the fleeting opportunity to use cap space, picks and/or young players under contract to squeeze the most value possible out of it. 4th Priority: Upgrade the Small Forward rotation. There are other items on the to-do list also: find a new home for Sergio, extend Brandon and LaMarcus, but you can see that the Small Forward situation is not the top priority it was a year ago. Circumstances have changed. Batum came out of nowhere and is similar in many ways to Childress. Holes at the 1 and backup 4 were a season-long constant irritation and crushed us against Houston. Childress just won't be getting Portland's attention early in the process like he might have. But, if he was the best option to maximize our current trade assets, he might be worth a look. Here are my concerns: I don't want to give up Batum in order to get Childress. If we give up Webster to obtain Childress, I would worry about our outside shooting from the 3 spot. That would almost require pairing up Batum/Childress with a Point Guard rotation that all shot the 3 well, which leave Bayless where?, and continues to force the team to rely heavily on Blake for spacing. The similarities in style of Batum and Childress reduces options for the coaches. I just don't feel the Childress love right now.
I don't think that's too much to give up for Childress. Early in the season, I was a big proponent of getting ahold of Childress this offseason. That's when I thought small forward was a gaping hole and Batum was the small forward equivalent of Koponen or Freeland...maybe someone who could be useful in a few years, but most likely not. With Batum's emergence, I no longer consider small forward a big hole, though I wouldn't mind an upgrade. Batum is close to an average starter, counting production and defense...Childress is well above average, counting production and defense. Having Childress and Batum would really solidify the position. If Portland could sign Andre Miller with their cap space and then do the HurraKane's proposed deal for Childress, I'd be very happy. I think the team would have a much more solid rotation, though backup power forward would still need to be addressed somehow. PG: Miller/Blake/Bayless SG: Roy/Fernandez SF: Childress/Batum PF: Aldridge/(draftee/veteran's min signing/Freeland) C: Oden/Przybilla
so it's not Outlaw, Webster & Sergio for just Childress, the capspace cleared is used to obtain another starter (hypothetically Miller or Hinrich) or, Portland gives up 3 players who'd all likely come off the bench, for the 2 best players mentioned who'd both probably start. Martell is a 37% 3 point shooter for his career Childress is a 36% 3 point shooter for his career Batum is a 37% 3 point shooter for his career STOMP
I tried to address this in my post above. There's a different kind of mentality between "opportunistic," last-resort, three point shooters and guys who make their living as 3 point specialists (granted, Martel has been no great shakes with that job description). You have to wonder that if you asked Childress and/or Batum to stand in the corner and hoist threes off of kickouts 5 times a game would their averages hold up? Batum doesn't have a large enough body of work to say for sure, Childress has always been a guy who takes threes as a last resort, and Martel at least has improved slightly in each of his 3 years, suggesting that he might eventually be a somewhat consistent 40%+ shooter from behind the arc. Who knows maybe lineups could be worked out so there is always a decent 3 point threat or two on the wing if you had Childress in the game (B-Roy, Blake ... maybe LMA if he keeps extending his range, though I'm not super stoked about him adopting that aspect of Sheed's game).
That boat sailed for me. I like Childress, but I'd like to continue to see what Batum and Webster can do for us.
Or you can look at it like I do, which is that Childress thought he was going to go over there and dominate, and when he didn't, he put his ass in a sling and headed home. That alone is good enough reason to not pick him up.
would it really take that much to get Childress? Atlanta have no bargaining power here, and with the crappy economy, how many teams are going to want to spend much money on a glue guy? I know there's about a ten year difference in their ages, but wouldn't teams just look at how well Posey worked out and think twice about spending the money? Personally, I'd be willing to send Atlanta Webster in a S&T for Childress, but that's about it. The Blazers don't really need to add a new SF, but with that deal, Atlanta actually gets something out of the Childress situation. We already have Rudy for what you're describing. Besides, I'm not so sure that running a guy around screens to get him an open three is the best offensive strategy. Webster was never that great at it, and it seemed to wear Rudy out this season. Running a PG rotation with two guys who can penetrate and kick it out is a better strategy. Yet another reason why upgrading the PG position is the most important thing to do this offseason.
He might have at some point. But when I watched a checkup on him partway through the season, he was playing ok. Put it this way. I don't think the Euro team thought they got their moneys worth.
Well being a number one guy has never been Childress' game, he rebounds, he scores on putbacks, he dunks a little, he defends and usually defers to the bonafide scorers and "stars." If they were expecting LeBron 2.0 or some massively dominant player then that's on them, not JC.
childress doesn't have the kind of game that dominates. he's a very solid all around player who is efficient in everything he does, but he's never going to take over a game. he didn't dominate college or the nba, why would he have thought he would dominate in europe?
i know this has been touched on before but last season webster took more 3s than childress has attempted in his 4 year career.
I don't think that matters much, but I'd be interested in someone expanding on why I should think it does. These guys do shoot hundreds of jumpers a day in practice, I don't see why it's some huge deal that they might take a few more in an actual game. If you equalize Batum's minutes to Martell's, the disparity in 3 point shots isn't really that great... Per 36 minutes, Martell shot 5.4 in 2007-8 to Nic's 4.2 this last season Last offseason we had lots of posters making the same sorts of claims about Travis not being able to remain a good 3 point shooter if he were to increase his attempts. While shooting more then twice as many as he had the year before, his % did drop all the way from 40% to 38%, but I think thats more or less the same clip. STOMP
It has a ton to do with the way defenses play you. If you get the reputation of being a dead-eye, volume, three point shooter (Jason Kopono, Danny Granger, Ray Allen et al.) you're going to have a great deal of trouble getting free for your shots as compared to a guy who rarely takes them. Think about it this way, what happened to Rudy after about the second month of the season? Teams figured him out and realized that his biggest threat was spotting up for fadeaway three pointers on the wing, they forced him to put the ball on the floor and try to shake free, which dropped his % steadily over time. If you take Nicolas or Childress and have them jacking up volume 3 point shots defenses will adjust and play them much more closely, which means you'd probably see guys who didn't shoot all that well from the perimeter when uncovered, shoot that much worse with a constant hand in their face.
