After watching how well the Rockets play with Shane Battier at the SF position, I believe Batum needs at least 30 minutes next season to continue growing. Batum has shown flashes this year and would have even shown more if he wasn't limited to just 18 minutes a game. I really believe we have something special in Batum. I see many similarities in him and Battiers games. In the Rockets system, Battier isn't asked to do much, just hit timely 3's and play great defense. Batum can already do that for us. We can't afford to satisfy every players needs and give them all minutes. If your going to say Batum is a liability on offense, well Battier only scores 7.3 points in 34 minutes for them. Batum scored 5.4 points for us in only 18 minutes. Unfortunately, Webster is going to take up around 25 to 30 minutes next season. If Outlaw stays and Webster even takes some of his minutes, Batum still is left with very minimal minutes at all. Also, do you start Batum or Webster? Pritchard is quoted as saying he expects a big season from Webster next year, so it looks like if he's healthy he will start at SF.
how did busting his butt all off season work out for Martell last year? It's okay for guys to take some time off during the summer. Hell Kobe claims to take a whole month away from working out before he goes after it again. Hoops is hard on the body. to the OP, I'm pretty sure that management isn't going to have Batum on the bench next season as he's shown more all around game then Travis or Martell ever have. I expect at least one of those two will not be back. STOMP
I agree, would like to see Batum get more minutes. Unless Martel can prove he can become a great defender, I would rather Martel come off the bench and add scoring punch with Rudy, Outlaw and Rudy. If we add another ok defender, you might as well add 2-3 more fouls to Greg and Joel. We need to be a better defensive team and get more turnovers to get past the second round in my opinion.
The Reason the Rockets can get away with it.. their PG can attack and score.. ours... well cannot. If we had a PG that could score then we could get away with a non scorer in at the 3.. but right now we have 2 options in the starting lineup.. not good.
This... is true.. It was easy for them to D us up. What options do we have at any time? LMA, Roy, then switch in subs, Rudy, Outlaw. it was always a 1-2 punch w/us. Never anything more. We need Marty back.... Batum would add great defensive abilities to the 2nd unit. 1st. Blake??/Roy/Martel/LMA/Oden 2nd. Bayless/Rudy/Batum/Outlaw/Pryz.
lol sorry about the "..." its just habit I guess. But I kinda like that lineup, althought Blake is insufficient unfortunately. But our 2nd Unit packs a scoring punch with Bayless, Rudy, and Roy. If we could somehow snag Kidd for 3 years, then we would be set IMO.
I didn't say players shouldn't work hard in the summer, I said there is nothing wrong with taking some time off in the summer. Martell reportedly didn't take any time off last summer. This comment was in response to your snarky comment about Greg taking some time off, as if we should think less of him for doing what most players do to let their bodies recover from the NBA grind. STOMP
Batum is awesome. Rookies need time, but Batum was the best wing defender on the team while still learning the ropes and before his body has matured. He understands the star system, and doesn't try to force himself on the offensive end. However, we really need someone who can do what Batum does on defense and be a larger threat on offense. There's no doubt in my mind that Batum will become such a player. However, today is not that day - regardless of working out in the offseason and on the French national team. That's why I've been an advocate of bringing in someone who can do both (threat on offense/guard other team's best wing), like Gerald Wallace. After a couple of years Wallace backs up Batum btw, Webster is marginal at both (threat on offense/guard other team's best wing), he's neither the short term or long term answer imho, but I could be wrong on that.
I think this next season is Websters make it or break it year... I'm assuming since he has that body-build, he can be that defender, or at least won't get blown off the dribble by other 3's...
That was said last year, and the year before I think. I'm not blaming Webster, but as Roy said, we are going for a championship next year.
geez dude any chance in the future of you explaining yourself without going ballistic? I'm only responding to what you wrote not your unmentioned sources. I'm curious, were Nate or KP actually on courtside or was it just Quick & Co relaying how they feel? STOMP
huh? You cussed me out over absolutely nothing. Now I'm in the wrong for not appreciating it? whatever... STOMP
right, but I was just responding to you saying we should be bummed about Greg for not continuing to work out in Portland immediately following the season. You gave no reasoning that I agreed with. Saying it was a snarky comment doesn't seem particularly insulting or condescending to me and certainly not worthy of a "FU" personal attack. It's okay to take issue with a poster's comments/opinions, but not okay to attack a poster. if it had just been JQ's speculation I would have blown it off as that guy has real credibility issues. That it was Nate and KP does make me a bit concerned as those guys have his and the team's best interest in mind. I'd like to hear more about what exactly Greg is doing this offseason. How much time he's taking off while going back to OSU, will he be getting quality workouts while there, etc... Believe me I want to hear that the big man has put himself in position to have a great season... that he has put in the hard work. Hell, I expect that of him as a professional. I don't absolutely believe he needs to be in Portland working with the Blazer staff all summer to do this though. STOMP
snarky not snaky http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snarky... I like definition #6 I merely responded to what you wrote. I'm not sure how your original comment was anything but a slight towards Greg. The only thing I had to go off of for that comment was the compare/contrast with Nic. You've since further explained yourself, and we don't really seem to be in disagreement do we? If anything, my "snarky" line was intended to flush out your reasoning in making the comment. cool, I'll be looking for that STOMP
