Rudy Gay may be available for S&T

You don't understand why Camby is important?

Cogently argued.

 

In my case I'm comparing a 6-9 F to a 6-9 F. You're comparing a 6-1 PG to a 7-1 C. There's a difference.

 

....

No, the fact that Outlaw was having a down season and still had the best +/- or w/e it was after Camby. Yup, Outlaw was a better player than Roy,Aldridge, and yes, even Oden.

It's the truth.

 

Rik Smits had a much more well-rounded offensive game than Shaq. Hell, Stanley Roberts had a much more well-rounded offensive game than Shaq, and Shaq even agreed!

 

Smits didn't average more pts than Shaq, have a better career FG%, and get to the line more. Sorry.

 

Define "better player". All it shows is that the team did better with him on the floor.

It may be a true statement about you, but it doesn't say anything about me and it doesn't affect what I've said about Rudy Gay. You seem to think that whether or not you take somebody seriously means something.

 

The principle is the same: what matters is what you do...not how you do it. It doesn't matter if Gay has a thousand more ways to score the basketball if, in the end, he's only slightly more efficient in actually putting the ball in the hoop.

Amateur or professional scouting of players, and the "tools" they have, matters when you're evaluating prospects and trying to project them into the NBA. Once they actually have a significant NBA track record, "tools" don't matter...what matters is what they're actually doing. Gay has many more tools than Outlaw...it's a shame that he seemingly isn't able to translate them into being a dynamic all-around player.

 

So if there was a 9 foot tall, 500lb giant, who could park himself under the hoop and dunk it every time (and get fouled every time) but couldn't do ANYTHING ELSE, then he'd have a "well-rounded offensive game"?

 

And you used the stat to make a case for Outlaw over Gay.

Sure.

 

Gay averages 17ppg for his career while Outlaw is still in single digits. I'd say that shows what they're actually doing, and shows that being a more complete player is the reason why Gay starts and get those shots. You can make the playing time/# of shots argument, but this team wasn't a playoff team for the longest time while Outlaw was here and he could never secure the SF spot. Hell, McMillan elected to go with Batum after game 1 of the 2008-2009 season after Outlaw proved once again he isn't worth heavy minutes or a starting spot.

 

Huh?

 

I prefer Rudy Gay to Travis Outlaw, but neither plays for the Blazers. I prefer Nicolas Batum to Rudy Gay, and we already have Nico. We don't need Rudy Gay, and certainly not at what he probably wants to be paid and what it would take to get him. Moreover, I'd prefer to resign Travis for what he's worth than to trade assets to get Gay and pay him more than he's worth.

 

That's well put and very reasonable. I personally would prefer Travis to Gay even if they cost the same because Gay has only given the appearance of being a shot-hog who doesn't help team chemistry and doesn't even try on defense, whereas Outlaw is possibly the nicest professional athlete around and the only reason that Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge ever got to know each other. Plus Travis is clutch: [video=youtube;R2Z4nxdjpnE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2Z4nxdjpnE&feature=related[/video]

 

Yes, but he doesn't do it particularly efficiently. The fact that a terrible organization has given him the green light to shoot as much as he wants isn't a particularly compelling argument to me. If he had been drafted by the Spurs and got that many minutes and shots, I'd find the argument much more valuable. Gay came into the league as a fairly hyped prospect and had a nice start to his career...he simply stalled out. In that context, the fact that a largely talentless team kept featuring him isn't surprising. It's possible that Outlaw would be worse if given the shots Gay is, but I don't think so. Most players decline with greater usage due to getting fewer of the "easy opportunities." Outlaw's role the past couple of seasons with Portland was to take the tough chances, when nothing else was working. The team certainly didn't attempt to feature him and get him good opportunities. They generally just threw it to him and said "Make something happen." Outlaw was no star at doing that, but I think his effectiveness would actually rise if given a system centered around him, like Memphis centered around Gay. I don't think a team would be successful doing that, but Memphis wasn't successful doing it with Gay, either.

 

Wow...I don't even think it is close...

Rudy Gay IMO is better now than Travis Outlaw ever will be...

For argument's sake if they were both UFA on the market does anyone really believe that Outlaw would recieve comprable contracts from NBA teams?

I think Outlaw is in for a rude awakenng this offseason and will likely sign on somewhere for cheap, that won't be the case for Rudy Gay...

Also, I don't think you can underestimate Outlaw's lack of bball IQ...the fact that even this year before he was dealt he had issue comprehending plays, after how many years in the league? Gay may have been a black hole\chucker in MEM, but he wasn't alone, and I certainly can't blame him, playing with that MEM team....

It would be interesating to see how Gay would respond to Nate, the guy has the defensive potential, he displayed it in college...and he would be a good scorer off the bench...problem is, could he accept that role?

 

Gay has a big ego and may think he is worth more than he is. Not even PA can afford 10 million for each starter at each position. So do you allocate that much for Gay?
Or do you wait for a PG. With Batum developing I say spend it on a PG unless someone better comes along.

Will Memphis even deal with us?

 

He ruined Rashard Lewis. How did he ever get a max contract?

 

How is PER seriously flawed? I'd like to learn how it is flawed, since I think it's probably the fairest individual statistic in basketball in assessing the overall abilities offensively of a player.

 

Ok. During his time as Portland's head coach, the SF possition is underutilized in our offense.

 

I don't think PER accurately reflects a players impact on a game. If a player has a bad quarter or half and his team gets blown out, but he makes up points in the 4th quarter when the game is already decided, his PER looks good, but it doesn't accurately emasure that players impact on the game when it mattered most..

IMO, PER is just one of several measureables that should be taken into account to get an overall perspective on a player, and not the most important...