I definitely agree that Outlaw isn't a good fit either for that role. The difference between Miller and Outlaw, though, is that Outlaw would be pretty easy to trade. He's still young, he's got athleticism that makes GM's drool, and (most importantly) he makes less than half of what Miller makes. I want us to trade Outlaw for either: 1. Somebody who is an upgrade at SF in areas we need (defense, perimeter shooting) 2. Somebody who is a better trading asset than Outlaw Miller doesn't qualify.
I think it's a big deal because regardless of what people think of Webster he was a nice fit to our starters. Also the fact that this could have an effect on whether we make playoffs this year. Not saying Webster is the deciding factor but he could mean the difference in 2-3 wins. Those 2-3 wins is what cost Denver a spot last year. I still wouldn't mind seeing Roy play some SF before deciding because it would also allow one of our best players to become a starter. Roy would be a mismatch in only a few games with guys like Lebron and Melo other than that he creates lots of problems for the other team at SF.
Co-sign. I just don't see Indy doing that deal unless the owner demands immediate cost cutting moves.
I think the Blazers should be more concerned with the PG position than the SF position. If there is a trade out there for a quality starting PG in the league, I hope the Blazers use thier assets to get that and let the Webster, Outlaw, Batum, Roy battle figure out the SF postion.
There aren't any realistic possibilities at small forward for the Blazers to trade for. What they need to do is wait patiently for Mike Conley Jr. I'm telling you. He's going to break out this year. And I think the Grizz will be better with Lowry and Mayo. They complement each other better. With Oden and Aldridge, Portland can go small on the wings. Roy, Fernandez, and Conley would be exciting, cerebral, and hard working. This is the move that must be done!
Thanks to Mook for the talking point. Recent NBA Champions: 2008: Celtics, featured not one, but two fine wing defenders to stop Kobe Bryant - Paul Pierce and James Posey. The Lakers best wing defender is also the number one option, thus they didn't have the ability to shut down Pierce. The Celtics with their two solid wing defenders got past LeBron James in the semis. 2007: Spurs, with Bruce Bowen (and Ginobili, who is actually an ok defender), were able to keep LeBron from single handedly winning in the Finals. 2006: Miami Heat, with James Posey, beat the Dallas Mavs, a better team. 2005: Spurs (Bowen) over the Detroit Pistons. 2004: Detroit (Prince, but with lots of team defense help from Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, etc.) over the Lakers. 2003: Spurs (Bowen) over New Jersey. 2002; 2001; 2000: Lakers (Rick Fox) over New Jersey. Actually, here is our first example. Fox wasn't all that as a defender. Decent, but not in the class of the above guys. This Lakers team wasn't about lockdown defense like the Spurs. They played above average defense and outstanding offense. Fact is, they had Shaq and Kobe. Just try to stop them from getting a bucket. You couldn't. Thus, defense was important to the Lakers but not essential. 1999: Spurs. Another example. No Bruce Bowen yet. Had the Twin Towers defense with Duncan and Robinson. All wings had to do was funnel guys into the teeth of the defense. 1998 and for many years prior. Bulls, Bulls, Bulls. Scottie as the defensive cake, Jordan as the icing. If they didn't want you to score a bucket, you probably didn't, as a parade of Hall of Fame offensive players found out. Do we absolutely have to have a lockdown wing defender? No. Are we giving ourselves the best shot at making regular shots at the title without a lockdown wing defender? I don't think so.
On courtside they were talking about the gold mine we have in Raef's contract and one name popped up that is most likely a pipe dream but good for conversation: Rudy Gay.
Nate had him guarding Kobe in the 4th for stretches in several of last years games where he did decently. Melo too. Nate also has him lining up against decent bigger guys like KG and Brad Miller. I don't think he's a world beater on D, but he's not Mike Miller bad by a long stretch. Thats being ridiculous STOMP
Fun to dream about (plus Portland would have the three excellent talents from the 2006 draft), but why in the world woul Memphis trade their potential franchise player without getting one back? Assuming Oden, Aldridge and Roy are off the table, the best (reasonable) deal Portland could offer is LaFrentz, Outlaw and one of Bayless/Fernandez and a first round pick for Gay and a bad contract. I can't see that being enough.
if melo bought into the team, he would be a huge addition. fucking huge. bayless roy melo lma oden wowsa
I think Rudy is that fourth big horse on our team instead of Bayless, and outside of Roy, Aldridge and Oden. Bayless has a long way to go in fitting into the team concept, and not having to be the man -- probably for the first time ever in his life.
Nate switched him onto K*be, after Martell had been guarding him for 2 1/2 quarters to the tune of 8 points scored. When Travis was done guarding him, he had (iirc) 35.
Mike Rice mentioned last night on courtside that Nate might be considering a lineup of Roy, Rudy, Channing, LMA, Greg (or possibly Blake, Roy, Channing, LMA, Greg). Supposedly Channing really can hit the the 3, and he has gotten a lot leaner over the summer, but I wonder if he'd have the speed to keep quicker small forwards in front of him ... at the very worst I guess there wouldn't be anyone who could shoot over us -- talk about an insanely tall starting lineup.
