...except 3 point shooting and being a go to option at the end of the clock. it's Webster who obviously has his work cut out for him. Batum is a better defensive option then either Travis or Martell and has the best handle/floor game too. Travis is the best shooter and scorer. Martell's calling card is his court spreading outside shot and both TO and NB are shooting the deep ball significantly better then Webster has in any season. Webster's D is such that KP was openly siting the need to add a good wing defender throughout last season... and then he traded up for Nicolas. with the emergence of Batum so early on in his career, probably Travis or Martell do need to go as both are SF sized players. Travis would probably have the higher value on the trade market but I also think he's the better fit with the roster. that said I doubt anything will happen until we get a lot closer to the trade deadline STOMP
Who exactly are you talking about? That litany of past predictions certainly doesn't describe me. It's easy to play that game, of making up an imaginary profile of failure and associating it with the opposing viewpoint. Watch: "The same people who think Conley Jr. will be a really good NBA player thought Christian Laettner was a future NBA star, Damon Stoudamire was going to be a Hall of Famer and that Adam Morrison was the best pick for Portland. These people have no skills in talent evaluation." If you can't make an argument beyond "You don't know basketball, I'm clearly right," then you don't have much to contribute.
I am sorry - but I still do not see how Martel was worth the #6 pick. Would anyone trade Granger for Webster? Would anyone trade Bynum for Webster? How about Maxiell for Webster? David Lee? All of these players were taken after the #6 spot and all are much better players now and into the future. Martel was probably an end of the lottery talent in this draft. I doubt anyone called Sergio a bust - he was a #27 pick and he plays, pretty much, like a good value for a #27 pick - but that's about it - he is just starting to play like a proper backup NBA point-guard (which is good) - but let's face it - he was not and is not a player that would solve huge problems to good NBA teams. Same, basically, goes for Conley Jr. I would rate him as a good value at the #10-15 position in the draft - a project PG with no shot but with exceptional speed and good defense - much better than Telfair - because his defense is much better - but an NBA talent? Yes, as a project - but Bayless is a much bigger talent than MC Jr. His shot is much better, his ability to attack the rim is what you would hope MC Jr. would one day develop, just as capable defensively and probably only slightly behind at distributing the rock - a talent that is less important for Portland.
Proof has to do with science... Good basketball scouts and GM's realize that good scouting is not a science, but an "art". KP knows this and has said as much. The John Nash and Bob Whitsett's of the world only look at what is in front of them... they're the guys that need proof .... They're scientists, not artists. They only see something (talent) after it's already happened. KP the artist, uses everything he knows about the world, people and gathering every bit it information he can to project the skill set and how everything will develop. How to explain the art of projecting a skill set and personality development is very difficult to explain. Actually, I don't think it can be explained. But I can assure you that if your looking for proof as it pertains to how a rookie will develop in the nba, you're barking up the wrong tree by saying "I need proof before I'll know". I can however tell you that one of the best ways to develop that artistry is to pick a young player and project to yourself how he will develop based on everything you know. Then observe that player for years and see how your projection held up. You're going to be wrong a lot, but you'll get better with time... The worst thing you can do is not try the projections and just sit back and wait till they've done something and say, "ahaa, there's proof. I've got my proof now". Try that approach and I guarantee you'll be a smarter GM in 45 years than someone who just sits back and waits for proof. By the way, I've been an avid basketball fan for over 45 years. Not saying I'm smarter than anyone, but I think I have more experience than most of the youngsters here. If I come across as a gruff cranky ol' bastard, it's because I am. You'll understand that much better when your life is behind you and every part of your body hurts when you get up in the morning... lol, have a nice day.
Pretty much all excellent GMs understand that it is both...observation as well as statistical analysis. Going purely by observation is folly, for a number of reasons, but so is going entirely by numbers. Pritchard has also been one of the proponents of using advanced statistical models as a part of talent evaluation. You're creating a strawman when you set this up as an "art/observation vs. science/statistics" debate. I am certainly not suggesting it should just be about statistics. I think both are important, and Pritchard clearly does too. That's what makes him a smart and modern GM. Conley wasn't impressive statistically and he wasn't impressive to my observation. I watched a lot of his games in college, because I was extremely interested in Greg Oden, since he was supposed to be the biggest phenom since LeBron James. Conley didn't destroy defenses with either his slashing or his passing, as special NBA talents tend to do in college. He also seemed far too content to pull up and fire three-pointers. So far in the NBA, he neither looks special nor has he done anything special. So, it really isn't a question of approach, "art" or "science." We simply disagree on the observational aspect. And the statistics don't suggest that his unimpressive looking game is deceptive. Could he break out? Sure, he could. I wouldn't call him a bust yet. But considering that I don't think he's terribly impressive at any aspect of the game (other than quickness), my belief is that he isn't going to break out. I respect your opinion, and I acknowledge that you may be right and I may be wrong on how he looks. But I trust my own evaluation more. Ultimately, I trust Pritchard's evaluation the most. If he trades for Conley, that would lead me to question my own appraisal.
You're right, KP is a good GM. Which is why he would never do any of the trades that you've suggested. Conley is not going to step up as an elite PG player. It takes three years for PG's to breakout? Rodney Stuckey? Derron Williams? Chris Paul? Derrick Rose? You must really love Ohio State. Conley is short and simply not that good. I'd much rather have Bayless, whom before he slid on draft night was considered a likely top-4 pick in this draft. Warrick is also not any good; Frye at least is a very good shooter who can spread the floor (not to mention he loves Portland). I'm about ready to start ignoring someone on this site.
I wouldn't want Bayless. I think he's better then Conley, but he isn't the type of player we need. We need a pass first PG, because we already have the scorers in Gay and Mayo. The perfect situation would be trade Conley for a PF that can defend and rebound, and then draft Rubio or Jennings in the draft.
I trust my own opinion more than anyone else too; based on my track record, that's a pretty good thing. But out of anyone else on this or BBB sites, Minstrel would have to be the person I have to respect and agree with more than anyone else. Both about basketball and OT threads, ironically enough.
I don't think I have anything new to add to this thread or any of the other ones from the past, except this: isn't it WEIRD that this rumor keeps popping up? If one guy was a perfect fit, I can see it... but Conley would NOT step right into a starting role (and might not even be in the rotation) and Outlaw probably would not be a starter, either. Rudy Gay is THE guy that the Blazers should want from Memphis... but that doesn't mean much, I don't think. Ed O.
I think it's cute that you think Travis will maintain his rediculous 3pt %. Batum is the better shooter, and Travis was a go to option last year. He hasn't been one this year. Travis is also dumb as a rock on the floor.
Like that would ever happen in the NBA, a player that didn't want to be on the team he was on, tanking it, causing problems, not living up to his contract, I don't believe it. Come on man, that is why they have guaranteed contracts so this sort of thing doesn't happen. I don't believe it!
If that was so, Portland's coach and GM are total idiots for resigning and playing him so much. It's much more likely that you are as far from reality on this as you are with the rest of your bitter post I've made several mentions that Travis likely won't maintain his ridiculous 3 point %... if he does he'll have had one of the greatest years from deep of any player ever and thats just not very likely. But he was a better 3 point shooter last year and has improved on that significantly. We heard plenty from Webster's backers that TO's higher percentage was an illusion of sorts, that he didn't shoot them enough to qualify and how he would struggle with an expanded role. This year playing with better players (Rudy and w/the starters more) he's moving the ball more, shooting less and getting better looks from 3... the sort that Martell enjoyed last year. That Travis absolutely was a go to option last season and again this year, is not debatable. After Roy, he is the guy that coach has designated to go when the clock is winding down. I'm sure all of us (well most of us) would prefer that he never misses those contested shots, but those are rough looks which most players can't free themselves up for. Down the road I'm expecting Bayless to become a 3rd go option as he, like Brandon and Outlaw, is a top shelf explosive athlete capable of creating the space necessary to generate a look. Having players capable of doing more then one thing is good! It's not my opinion that Batum is shooting a higher percentage from the field and from deep then Martell ever has. You can root against Nicolas all you want, but facts are what they are. It is my opinion (and seemingly most everyone here) that his D and handle are vastly superior. Another fact is that besides Travis and Nic, Blake and Rudy are also shooting the deep ball better then MW ever has. Portland is 2nd in the league in 3 point % at 0.414 and is making 2.25 more per game then they did last year. With additional perimeter threats from LA and Frye, the court is spread. I don't see a great need for Martell's stand in the corner until left wide open game. I think he's going to have to develop some new wrinkles if he's to garner significant PT... we'll see what coach thinks soon enough. STOMP
Yep, spot on. They need Rubio. And while Bayless is probably better than conley, the blazers dont need Conley and the Grizz don't need Bayless. so....
What a difference a year makes... I remember clearly last year there was a rumor, by Yahoo.com, that a LaMarcus for Conley swap was possible. Reading an article (RealGm ticker) the Grizzlies have admitted that they've been talking to Portland recently, FWIW.
