Why should he? Some people seem to have Outlaw blinders on around here. I would openly challenge anybody who says Outlaw is a good player to sit down side by side and watch footage and rationalize some of the shit he does on the court.
On a 31-51 team. I see nothing wrong with any of this If it isn't typically fun, why would anybody want to post here?
I think the only guy failing chemistry right now is Brandon Roy. Look, Brandon has got to learn to adjust his game as the players around him get better.....Him wanting Steve Blake in the backcourt is ALL about making him feel more comfortable...and what is best for HIM, not for the team.... Miller's presence in the lineup makes everyone ELSE around him better...more looks for Oden, for Aldridge, and for Batum\Webster...and he provides another player who can put PRESSURE on opposing defenses... If the playoffs vs HOU showed anything, they showed that this team cannot expect to succeed in the playoffs, relying on Roy to do it all...They WILL NOT advance far in the playoffs that way.... Steve Blake is the easy out for Roy, because having Miller in the backcourt with him, forces ROY to change the way he approaches the game...He can't expect to dominate the ball like he has been, he can't expect to be the one making 90% of the plays on offense for the team...and you know what? That is a GOOD thing.... Roy needs to learn to play OFF THE BALL better, he needs to learn how to PICK the spots where he wants to dominate, just like Kobe\LeBron\Pierce etc do.... Why can't he see this? I mean, if POR somehow got Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Derrick Rose, Devin Harris, Steve Nash or Jason Kidd is Nate\Roy or anyone else here really going to say that they too should come off the bench, because Roy is more comfortable with Blake as his backcourt mate? I mean that would border on the absurd..... This shouldn't be a problem for Roy....He was successful doing it in All Star games, when he was paired with superior players....and now here he is resisting doing exactly that, and IMO exerting pressure on Nate to keep Blake as the starter.....it is beyond ridiculous.... The problem isn't Miller...or Oden...or Webster...the problem is specifically Roy...and Nate... Yeah, I understand that Roy is our "franchise" player...but that doesn't mean a damm if the franchise caves to his every whim to the detriment of the team as a whole....Having Miller AND Roy in the backcourt together is best for everyone...the sad part is that our franchise player can't seem to understand\grasp that.....and the blame for that lies squarely on his shoulders....and Nate is complicit because he either can't see it or refuses to "enlighten" Roy to theis fact..... The team's problems in the preseason are because of Roy people.....
unbelievable, how about instead I just tell you you're full of it and/or need to replace your coke bottle glasses? whats good for the goose... STOMP
In other words, a two-time All Star, max contract, franchise player entering his 4th season needs to shape his game around Andre Miller, who has never been an All Star and who never has won squat. Sorry, I don't buy it. Miller is shooting balls like it's a game of HORSE. He needs to adapt to the team that won 54 games, not the other way around.
What actually crosses the border into the absurd is comparing Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Steve Nash, or a younger Jason Kidd with Andre Miller. If Derrick Rose or Devin Harris were signed, I'd expect them to play a secondary role to at least Roy, and probably LMA and Oden.
I agree that Roy is higher in the pecking order than Miller, and I suspect that's why Miller is not clearly starting despite the fact that he is a better player than Blake - but, I very much doubt Roy's problems are mostly because of Miller. It is probably more of the time it takes to get his basketball timing again. Let's not forget that Roy had rough starts before, his 2nd year start was not good and we had some issues with him playing poorly in the pre-season before starting to get in a groove. In other words - I am pretty sure that Roy will get back in the groove within a week or two if not earlier - and you will see Miller shooting less once this happens. With Roy out of sync, LMA out of the game - Miller pretty much had to offer some offensive punch - that's what he was brought for - to take the load off Roy. Color me not ready to jump to conclusions and not ready to be really worried.
I'm not worried. Concerned a bit? Sure. I was more so just answering a lengthy post, a post which I disagreed with, that started with the sentences: I don't buy that. He has already been adjusting his game. He used to lead the team in shots. Now, he's a distant 2nd. The early results are the team isn't playing well. I trust it will be worked out, but I find pinning any chemistry issues solely on Roy is unfair, uneducated, and unnecessary.
Here's a counter challenge: come up with a list of veteran players (ie not on their rookie deals) who make under $4 mill and *don't* make bad plays. See, if they weren't making bad plays, they would be starters making 3-4 times the money.
That's fair. I really do not think Roy is a cause for concern in any way, shape or form, especially - as far as chemistry is concerned.
My main Gripe with Outlaw is what I think we need is a more inside PF, especially if Greg and Andre move to the starting lineup. we would have 4 perimeter players and Joel as our 2nd rotation. That's not a great recipe.
What? If all you ever look at are numbers sometimes you get the wrong impression. Zach Randolf is a prime example. On paper the dude looks awesome. In person, not so much. Stats don't show Zach not making past half court on defense. There is a reason scouts watch film on teams instead of reading their stat line when preparing for a team. Seeing is believing. Hopefully you will realize that is true. With Outlaw it's the absolute truth. On paper he looks pretty good. In person, not so much. You have watched him play and apparently disagree. Great! As thinking creatures I would expect people to disagree. However saying something that implies observation isn't worth much is pretty stupid. Hopefully that isn't what you meant. If I had access to Synergy or something like it, I would post multiple clips showing what I am talking about. Unfortunately I don't so I can't. Also, it really is an honest question. I am asking if they have ever focused on Outlaw for a quarter during a game. I did and didn't like what I saw. I am wondering if anyone else has done the same thing.
This year or in years past? This year I can't really name one but I haven't checked. Chucky Brown for the Celtics helped them win a title for the veteran minimum and was praised for his mistake free play. The Spurs have built a number of teams around guys who were smart vets who came in and didn't make mistakes. At least one of those guys made less then 4 million. Some folks are starters primarily because their bodies can't hold up for those kinds of minutes, not because they are mistake prone. From the HoopHype salary list: Boston: Rojon Rondo, Houston: Luis Scola, Chuck Hayes, Carl Landry Orlando: Brandon Bass Phoenix: Grant Hill Washington: Fabricio Oberto It's only a partial list, but these are the players who make less then 4 million a season who don't make nearly the number of mistakes Outlaw does.
Chucky Brown? The one that retired in 2001? I assume it was PJ Brown. PJ Brown played 18 regular season games for the Celtics, he was their 9th best player and had a PER of 10.1 doing it. In the Playoffs his contribution ascended to a majestic 8.2 PER. The Celtics did not require anywhere near the contribution from him that Portland needed from Outlaw, and quite frankly, if the options are a somewhat erratic regular rotation guy that is maybe your 3rd scorer and the only one other than Roy that can create his own offense and produces with a PER of 15.1 over a mistake free PJ Brown with 10.1 PER... The answer is Outlaw each and every day and twice on Tuesday. Wrong. The Spurs built a number of teams around 3 all-star players, with at least one of them a future hall-of-fame member and widely regarded as the best player ever to play his position. They added a bunch of role-players around them. The less than $4m players they had next to them were often mistake prone on offense (Bruce Bowen, arguably their 4th most important player on the squad that won the 2006/7 ring had a PER of 7.1 - which would make Sergio Rodriguez look like an all-NBA offensive player). It was just that they realized that he was there for a reason, defense, and as such, his $3.7m salary was justified even if he was a very bad offensive player. Just likewise, it is reasonable to accept that a guy like Outlaw, that is paid a role-player salary because he has a role (score, create shots for himself) - should be cherished for what he does - because he does not act like a prima-donna and pouts. Outlaw has limitations, as such, he is paid like a role player, he also has a role, which he did pretty well - score and provide a 2nd go to guy when push comes to shove. Outlaw is what he is. When this team graduates to having more go-to scorers - his minutes will be cut if his role is no longer needed. That's all there is.
I'm still struggling with Roy solely needing to adapt his game as the team gets "better players" such as Miller. Shouldn't Miller, who has never played with talent like this in his career, or for a 54-win team for the matter, be adjusting his game instead of Roy soley adjusting to Miller? I don't get the Roy bashing. Outlaw? Sure Blake? OK Miller? Yeah Przy? Go for it. But Roy as being the problem? Foolish.
Bullshit. Miller has to fit in with us. We don't have to fit in with him. I know it's only preseason, but he has NO BUSINESS taking 18 shots in a game. That is fucking ridiculous. That is not his role with the talent we have on our team. 18 fucking shots? Blake has never ever taken 18 shots. He knows his role. Miller does not.
Miller IS us. Wrapped, Delivered, with a pretty pink ribbon on top. Everyone needs to gel for this thing to work.
