# Why is everyone deserting Travis Outlaw?



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

I can't believe he only got 5 votes on the 4th Beatle poll. That's ludicrous. He was often the 2nd best player on our team last season. He made so many huge plays for us and will only get better. Even Coach Demopoulos said we have a Big 4, including Travis Outlaw, "one of the great clutch shooters in the league." Yes, Rudy is promising, but Outlaw has already proven himself and now people want to trade him? Stop the hating on Travis please!

Go Blazers


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

Because he raises pit bulls!


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

I imagine that most people have "deserted" Outlaw in favor of Rudy because people are in love with Rudy's performance in the Olympics, and specifically in the gold medal game.

I can't blame them, but I'll be interested to see how long Rudy gets away with jacking up 22' jump shots while guarded when they only count for two points.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

KingSpeed said:


> I can't believe he only got 5 votes on the 4th Beatle poll. That's ludicrous. He was often the 2nd best player on our team last season. He made so many huge plays for us and will only get better. Even Coach Demopoulos said we have a Big 4, including Travis Outlaw, "one of the great clutch shooters in the league." Yes, Rudy is promising, but Outlaw has already proven himself and now people want to trade him? Stop the hating on Travis please!
> 
> Go Blazers


An ability to hit clutch shots doesn't make you the second best player on the team Eric. Was Steve Kerr the second best player on the Bulls? He hit a few game winners. 

I haven't seen anyone hating on Travis. He is the most logical player to be traded. Period.


----------



## hoojacks (Aug 12, 2004)

I voted for Travis as the 4th wheel. He isn't the most logical person to be traded until we trade a PG.
I'd rather hold on to Travis than Martell at this point, but not by much.


----------



## NWDJ (Mar 29, 2008)

Every year a player is picked to be that player that "should be traded" of "sent to the D-League". With such a great group of guys, I was wondering who it would be this year. I guess it's Travis' turn, which is too bad. A good guy in the community, in the locker room, so we've heard, who shows increasing skills and dosen't complain about his role as 6th man. 

Trade him, and will you get someone with those same qualities?


----------



## AudieNorris (Jun 29, 2006)

KingSpeed said:


> I can't believe he only got 5 votes on the 4th Beatle poll. That's ludicrous. He was often the 2nd best player on our team last season. He made so many huge plays for us and will only get better. Even Coach Demopoulos said we have a Big 4, including Travis Outlaw, "one of the great clutch shooters in the league." Yes, Rudy is promising, but Outlaw has already proven himself and now people want to trade him? Stop the hating on Travis please!
> 
> Go Blazers


What else is Demopoulos gonna say? Maybe he should have said, "Outlaw is a great trade piece to get the us a point guard". Or, "Outlaw responded well when we showcased him in 4th quarters for a potential trade". Outlaw's the odd man out.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

NateBishop3 said:


> I haven't seen anyone hating on Travis. He is the most logical player to be traded. Period.


There is a well documented divide between Martell fans and Travis fans. As a Travis fan, I would have to disagree and say Martell should be traded before Travis. However, I don't think its logical to trade either right now.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> There is a well documented divide between Martell fans and Travis fans. As a Travis fan, I would have to disagree and say Martell should be traded before Travis. However, I don't think its logical to trade either right now.


Who said anything about "should". I said the most logical, and I stand by that. Travis has a ton of value right now, Martell does not.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

NateBishop3 said:


> I haven't seen anyone hating on Travis. He is the most logical player to be traded. Period.


What, you missed the Travis Outlaw for Kyle Lowry thread? That one is a joke, and the Outlaw hate in it is ridiculous. I say this as someone who is willing to package Outlaw with Frye and Sergio for Kirk Hinrich.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

NateBishop3 said:


> Who said anything about "should". I said the most logical, and I stand by that. Travis has a ton of value right now, Martell does not.


OK, fine. I think Martell is the most _logical_ player to be traded right now. 

Travis has more trade value because he's better than Martell. Why would we trade our best SF away???


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

NateBishop3 said:


> I haven't seen anyone hating on Travis. He is the most logical player to be traded. Period.


the most logical player to be traded would be no one.

there's absolutely no reason for the blazers to make a trade. obviously if a great deal comes along it has to be considered and maybe done but the blazers really should be looking to go into this season with the exact roster they have right now.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

rocketeer said:


> the most logical player to be traded would be no one.
> 
> there's absolutely no reason for the blazers to make a trade. obviously if a great deal comes along it has to be considered and maybe done but the blazers really should be looking to go into this season with the exact roster they have right now.


I completely agree. I think it would make more sense to trade Martell before Travis though. But I say keep 'em both unless something great comes along.


----------



## Short Bus Ryder (Jun 8, 2007)

I think that its crazy to think about changing anything on this team. Until we see what happens.

T-Law does have more trade potential, I agree with that.


----------



## dreamcloud (Aug 8, 2008)

Let's face it, the rip city article by Quick pretty much has changed a large majority's view of Travis. It's a shame. I really hope people won't just make him the scapegoat through the season, but there are signs before the season even starts now (*sigh* thought we got away from that when Jack left). A lot fans won't feel the same excitement when Travis has a superb night because in the back of their mind, that article will have them think that he'll just leave us one day anyways and criticize him for trying to be "the man" too much.

I'm of the few that voted Travis. If this was asked 1.5 weeks ago, he would have had more votes


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

dreamcloud said:


> Let's face it, the rip city article by Quick pretty much has changed a large majority's view of Travis. It's a shame. I really hope people won't just make him the scapegoat through the season, but there are signs before the season even starts now (*sigh* thought we got away from that when Jack left). A lot fans won't feel the same excitement when Travis has a superb night because in the back of their mind, that article will have them think that he'll just leave us one day anyways and criticize him for trying to be "the man" too much.
> 
> I'm of the few that voted Travis. If this was asked 1.5 weeks ago, he would have had more votes



No offense, but the "Travis as scapegoat" meme has already been advanced and will be the theme of the season.

See this thread.

http://www.basketballforum.com/portland-trail-blazers/409788-blazers-offer-outlaw-memphis-pg.html


----------



## Miksaid (Mar 21, 2005)

^If a single article on Outlaw (or anyone, really) changes your opinion of him enough to turn love into hate then you should consider jumping off a bridge... After I write you an article on why it would be a good idea, of course.


----------



## mobes23 (Jun 29, 2006)

It's all craziness born out of an offseason that feels like it's been way too long. I'm looking forward to seeing Martell's outside shot get even better and Outlaw's crazy clutch work off the bench. No dumb trades unless it really, truly makes us clearly better.


----------



## #10 (Jul 23, 2004)

PapaG said:


> I can't blame them, but I'll be interested to see how long Rudy gets away with jacking up 22' jump shots while guarded when they only count for two points.


Do that and he becomes KingSpeed's favorite player, if his Outlaw love is anything to go by.

I don't hate Outlaw, but I'm not a big fan of his game. He's a bit of a black hole, he's a 4 who's going to be asked to play the 3, he's bad on D, etc. He's more logical to trade away than Webster because he still has more value. That doesn't mean I hate him, he's a solid bench scorer, but not starter material in my mind.

Demopoulos can say whatever he wants but until I see the same thing on the court, I'll take it as seriously as I took Nate's "Green wins us a few games" comment.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

#10 said:


> Do that and he becomes KingSpeed's favorite player, if his Outlaw love is anything to go by.
> 
> I don't hate Outlaw, but I'm not a big fan of his game. He's a bit of a black hole, he's a 4 who's going to be asked to play the 3, he's bad on D, etc. He's more logical to trade away than Webster because he still has more value. That doesn't mean I hate him, he's a solid bench scorer, but not starter material in my mind.
> 
> Demopoulos can say whatever he wants but until I see the same thing on the court, I'll take it as seriously as I took Nate's "Green wins us a few games" comment.


Took the words right out of my mouth.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

NateBishop3 said:


> Who said anything about "should". I said the most logical, and I stand by that. *Travis has a ton of value right now, Martell does not.*


Brandon Roy has a ton of value right now, Sergio does not...

And if I'm choosing between two guys who play the same spot, I'd rather keep the better player. Is that logical?

STOMP


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I have never been a big Outlaw fan. Once again, he is Hakim Warrick with a bit better J who also happened to hit 6-8 big shots last season. He is still a bad defender, he still cant hit a 3 unless wide open(Watch his form, dude has to be wide open because he always jumps forward when he shoots 3's), he has very poor foot speed, he is best at 4 but cant play post or guard most 4's(Save Warrick), he is a black hole approaching Zach size, he cant dribble which means he cant attack the basket well(Either can Martell in all fairness, and further we really dont need a SF that attacks the basket well) and finally he is hailed as instant offense despite the fact his points-per-shot were nearly identical to Webster. People use his SPG and BPG stats to say he is a better defender, but that is hogwash to anyone who is well versed in NBA obsession. 

This team is young and needs veteran presences, who know how to sacrafice for their team. I am not saying Outlaw is necessairly going to take more sacrafices than Webs. But, he has more trade value, is a worse fit for this team and is locked up to such a cheap contract his trade value is even more. 

Flame me to death. I want Kirk & Noc for Raef, Outlaw, Blake and a protected 1st.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

PapaG said:


> No offense, but the "Travis as scapegoat" meme has already been advanced and will be the theme of the season.
> 
> See this thread.
> 
> http://www.basketballforum.com/portland-trail-blazers/409788-blazers-offer-outlaw-memphis-pg.html


You were repeatedly schooled after showing shocking ignorance of Lowry. It's not hate that denies that Outlaw is as good as some Outlaw lovers claim.

Ed O.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Outlaw is a good player, but his main strength is shooting, particularly "clutch" shooting. Last season he and Roy were pretty much the only clutch players on the roster.

This season, with Fernandez, Bayless, and Oden, there's more clutch shooting coming in, and _all_ of those guys, by position, are average or better in most other aspects of the game: defense, rebounding, steals, blocks, ball-handling, free throw shooting, creating for others, etc. Outlaw, outside of his main strength, is average to below average in most of those categories. Thus, when McMillan needs clutch shooting _and_ defense, etc., he'll have other options beyond Outlaw. I'm picturing a lot of 4th quarters with something like Bayless, Roy, Fernandez, Aldridge, and Oden.

So for me, it's not about the Quick article. It's about the fact that _neither_ Webster nor Outlaw are what I'd consider ideal SFs for this team -- a Pippen/Bowen sort of player who's main strengths aren't necessarily shooting but are, instead, defense, rebounding, and/or ball-handling and creating for others. Both Webster and Outlaw seem like great guys and it's probably worth keeping one of them as a back up but I'd move both of them (presumably with LaFrentz) to get a young Pippen or Bowen.


----------



## BlayZa (Dec 31, 2002)

*swoon*
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cWyKXOiXKOM&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cWyKXOiXKOM&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

NateBishop3 said:


> An ability to hit clutch shots doesn't make you the second best player on the team Eric. Was Steve Kerr the second best player on the Bulls? He hit a few game winners.
> 
> I haven't seen anyone hating on Travis. He is the most logical player to be traded. Period.


Kerr is a TERRIBLE comparison. Travis didn't just hit a couple clutch shots. He was very often our go to guy down the stretch and he delivered. LMA hit a slump a bit during the 2nd half of the season and Outlaw became one of the TWO guys we could go to. He would often carry us in 4th quarters. Kerr was never a go to guy who could create his own shot. He just hit open shots created by Jordan and Duncan.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

AudieNorris said:


> What else is Demopoulos gonna say? Maybe he should have said, "Outlaw is a great trade piece to get the us a point guard". Or, "Outlaw responded well when we showcased him in 4th quarters for a potential trade". Outlaw's the odd man out.


Here was the context. He wasn't asked about Outlaw. He was asked about the Big 3 and Dean said "there's actually a Big 4" referring to Outlaw.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> I have never been a big Outlaw fan. Once again, he is Hakim Warrick with a bit better J who also happened to hit 6-8 big shots last season. He is still a bad defender, he still cant hit a 3 unless wide open(Watch his form, dude has to be wide open because he always jumps forward when he shoots 3's),
> 
> 
> > Except for his 4 point play in Toronto, right? He was fouled on the three and knocked it down.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Another thing. In Dean's interview, he went on to say something to the effect of "Outlaw shoots at the end of games like it's the beginning of the game" meaning that he has a rare quality of being cool under pressure. This is something you can't teach. Outlaw has this rare quality and we would've only won 35 games last season without him. At most. A single player who makes that big of a difference should feel more support on this board.


----------



## Nate Dogg (Oct 20, 2006)

I voted for Travis. He will take some gambles to get an open wild shot or a dunk on someone. I give him credit. Dunks like that over Yao ming in that previous post just shows that Travis will bring out intense power when he wants to.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

KingSpeed said:


> I can't believe he only got 5 votes on the 4th Beatle poll. That's ludicrous. He was often the 2nd best player on our team last season. He made so many huge plays for us and will only get better. Even Coach Demopoulos said we have a Big 4, including Travis Outlaw, "one of the great clutch shooters in the league." Yes, Rudy is promising, but Outlaw has already proven himself and now people want to trade him? Stop the hating on Travis please!
> 
> Go Blazers


Your original quote of Coach Demopoulos is wrong, he said when speaking of Outlaw 'he is one of the good..[pause] great young clutch players in the league' with an emphasis on young, as in he's still got a long way to go. He also said it was almost like having a big 4 late in games with Outlaw, it certainly wasn't putting him on the same level as Roy, Oden, Aldridge in terms of overall game/value.

And like someone else pointed out, he can say what he wants about Travis just like Nate said Green was going to win us 2-4 games last season but coach praising one of his own players has to be taken with a large grain of salt.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

KingSpeed said:


> Another thing. In Dean's interview, he went on to say something to the effect of "Outlaw shoots at the end of games like it's the beginning of the game" meaning that he has a rare quality of being cool under pressure. This is something you can't teach. Outlaw has this rare quality and we would've only won 35 games last season without him. At most. A single player who makes that big of a difference should feel more support on this board.


If only he could shoot at the beginning of games like it was the end of games then maybe we would have been closer in some of our losses. No one can question his performance in the 4th quarter, but his shooting prior to the 4th was often lacking, and performing well in 25% of the game isn't worth a massive upwelling of support IMO.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> I have never been a big Outlaw fan. Once again, he is Hakim Warrick with a bit better J who also happened to hit 6-8 big shots last season. He is still a bad defender, he still cant hit a 3 unless wide open(Watch his form, dude has to be wide open because he always jumps forward when he shoots 3's)





KingSpeed said:


> Except for his 4 point play in Toronto, right? He was fouled on the three and knocked it down.


or the game winner vs ATL where they cleared out for him and he dropped a three over Josh Smith from the top of the key. I can recall many other of his 3s where he rose over tight coverage usually as the clock was winding down. Dude is the focus of the 2nd unit's attack and was pretty much never left wide open.

Outlaw today is far from a great player to my eyes and his defense is poor, but this 3 point claim is baseless. The guy who can't create space for himself to get an open look at the 3 point line or elsewhere is Martell. Unfortunately Webster is also every bit the bad defender Outlaw is. Hopefully one of them steps it up on the defensive end this year. 

STOMP


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

STOMP said:


> or the game winner vs ATL where they cleared out for him and he dropped a three over Josh Smith from the top of the key. I can recall many other of his 3s where he rose over tight coverage usually as the clock was winding down. Dude is the focus of the 2nd unit's attack and was pretty much never left wide open.
> 
> Outlaw today is far from a great player to my eyes and his defense is poor, but this 3 point claim is baseless. The guy who can't create space for himself to get an open look at the 3 point line or elsewhere is Martell. Unfortunately Webster is also every bit the bad defender Outlaw is. Hopefully one of them steps it up on the defensive end this year.
> 
> STOMP


That was a 2 pointer vs Atlanta, and I can't think of many times that he rose up over coverage for 3s, a ton of long 2s sure but rarely do defenders tightly cover Outlaw out past the 3pt arc. I can't seem to remember whether Outlaw's form on his 3s has him jumping forward like the poster claims, mostly because I can clearly remember Jack doing that on all his 3s but maybe Outlaw did too to a lesser extent.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Travis is dumb as a stump, a ball hog, he can't guard 3' or 4's very well and the more I hear him talk the more he sounds like a me first player

Travis is also really nice, and a guy you want to root for. But as far as basketball skills go, he would be the best one to trade.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

KingSpeed said:


> I can't believe he only got 5 votes on the 4th Beatle poll. That's ludicrous. He was often the 2nd best player on our team last season. He made so many huge plays for us and will only get better. Even Coach Demopoulos said we have a Big 4, including Travis Outlaw, "one of the great clutch shooters in the league." Yes, Rudy is promising, but Outlaw has already proven himself and now people want to trade him? Stop the hating on Travis please!
> 
> Go Blazers


Take a look at this:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2008.html
Scroll down to Advanced.

Travis is 7th on the team for Win Shares last season. Though 5 through 9 are all close, speaking to the depth.

Had Jones been healthy and played an entire season, there would have been 5 guys on the team that were notably more important to Blazer victories than Travis.

People remember the big Travis shots.

People forget that Travis shot us OUT of as many games as he shot us into victory.

Take a look at this:

http://www.blazersedge.com/2008/9/2/606449/a-look-at-trout-s-fgas

It shows that the more Travis takes a lot of shots, the less likely the team is to win.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

Alright so I'll see what I can do here. So, you say he was the 2nd best player at times last year. That means its safe to say you put Roy at number 1. IMO Aldridge was better last year, but we'll let that slide. With Oden coming in, Outlaw drops down to 3rd by your rankings for sure, if not 4th if you go by the conventional "Big 3". At the most, you could say Outlaw is getting shafted by one spot in the rankings of the "Big 4" thread. I don't think that's really worth getting upset about. I did vote for Rudy in that thread though because I think he will be a better long-term fit (although I'm not opposed to keeping Outlaw at all).

However, I'm a bit surprised by the amount of trade talk involving Outlaw, especially given the deals that have been reported. Outlaw/Pryz to basically get Conley seems like giving up a lot to me (and also knocks down Rudy and Jerryd's minutes a ton as well).


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I have no problem with what Outlaw said. It is nice to see the player finally oozing with confidence in his abilities after years of being tentative. The coaches will temper him, and mold him into the team concept. It just amazes me after having years and years of nobody wanting to take shots, now that we have players who do, people freak out about it.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Ed O said:


> *You were repeatedly schooled after showing shocking ignorance of Lowry. *It's not hate that denies that Outlaw is as good as some Outlaw lovers claim.
> 
> Ed O.


LOL

Pointing out that Outlaw was better than Kyle Lowry by a sizeable margin with the statistics provided is me being "schooled".

What a board.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Masbee said:


> Take a look at this:
> 
> http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2008.html
> Scroll down to Advanced.
> ...


In fairness, wasn't he also 3rd in PER? 

(in the interest of full disclosure - I am not a fan of "win shares")


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

STOMP said:


> Brandon Roy has a ton of value right now, Sergio does not...
> 
> And if I'm choosing between two guys who play the same spot, I'd rather keep the better player. Is that logical?
> 
> STOMP


What does that have to do with anything? I'm not the one making trades. You're not the one making trades. Kevin Pritchard is the GM of the Portland Trail Blazers. If he wants to make a trade, and he wants to get max value, Outlaw would be the most logical choice. It's buy low, sell high. Outlaw was a late first round draft pick. He was signed to a moderate contract. Webster was the 6th pick in the draft, he hasn't even been in the league four years, and we're ready to give up on him. That's bad business.

He is not part of our core, no matter what Kingspeed or anyone else thinks. Brandon Roy is part of our core. LaMarcus Aldridge is part of our core. Greg Oden is part of our core. You could put any combination around those three players and we would still be a successful team. Is Outlaw part of that? I do not think so. He isn't intrinsic to the future of this team.

I personally do not know what KP's plan is, but if he feels we need another point guard, who is the biggest chip we can cash in without breaking our core? Outlaw has the highest value right now. Webster does not. Outlaw would bring more value than Webster, do you not agree?


----------



## AudieNorris (Jun 29, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> Travis is dumb as a stump, a ball hog, he can't guard 3' or 4's very well and the more I hear him talk the more he sounds like a me first player
> 
> Travis is also really nice, and a guy you want to root for. But as far as basketball skills go, he would be the best one to trade.


"Dumb as a stump" is a bit harsh for someone you likely don't know real well. He may not play too intelligently in your opinion, but "Dumb as a stump"? Come on.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

AudieNorris said:


> "Dumb as a stump" is a bit harsh for someone you likely don't know real well. He may not play too intelligently in your opinion, but "Dumb as a stump"? Come on.




You are absolutely right. I misspoke. What I meant to say was that Travis is dumb as a stump on the court. I have no idea what he is like off the court.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

PapaG said:


> LOL
> 
> Pointing out that Outlaw was better than Kyle Lowry by a sizeable margin with the statistics provided is me being "schooled".
> 
> What a board.


You kept getting corrected and then you defined important stats either arbitrarily or nonsensically.

I think that's schooled on any board.

Ed O.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

AudieNorris said:


> "Dumb as a stump" is a bit harsh for someone you likely don't know real well. He may not play too intelligently in your opinion, but "Dumb as a stump"? Come on.


I know him off the court. The assessment, though harsh, is not inaccurate.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Oldmangrouch said:


> In fairness, wasn't he also 3rd in PER?
> 
> (in the interest of full disclosure - I am not a fan of "win shares")


Yet you quote PER?

Win Shares is just using PER type numbers and then attempting to factor in defense and team play, so that you get an idea about a players impact on BOTH ENDS.

That it fails to do a precise job does not make it less than PER.

Travis is rightly critisized for his poor defense and team play. No wonder those that support the (really lame) idea that Travis is (now as he is) part of the "big 4" don't want to dwell on those issues.

But those issues are PRECISELY why Travis has less of an impact on the game and on the team winning than other players who score less or aren't "clutch". Travis has a role that can be valuable, but he is limited, and as long as the coach keeps him on a leash, he can play a part.

You can moan that win shares is garbage because it says that Steve Blake and Joel and Jones and Martell were just as or more valuable to team success than Travis, but I watched plenty of Blazer games, and I felt that way before the stats for the season came out. Numbers only confirmed observation.

The team will not be sunk if we lose Travis.

The team will be sunk if it loses one of the big 3. Or most of it's depth. Not if just one part of that depth (Travis) is lost.


----------



## sjla2kology101 (Apr 23, 2006)

Its Simple, Outlaw doesn't want to be on the bench much longer and he wants to START. and there just isnt enough room on the Blazers starting line up for another scorer, Martell doesn't need 15 shots a game and can spread the defense out which is why hes a good solid starter at the 3. So why not trade outlaw before theirs any internal problems about him wanting to be the man and maybe causing trouble in the locker room.... realistically with his role on the team and the style of basketball he plays it just makes him the logical choice to be traded... at this point hes obviously one of the better players on the team but that doesn't mean hes best for THE team... I would love for it to work out with him though.... would hate to see any of our core guys go... but that's just me.


----------



## AudieNorris (Jun 29, 2006)

NateBishop3 said:


> I know him off the court. The assessment, though harsh, is not inaccurate.


In comparison to who? You? He is at least smart enough to be doing what he loves, seems to care for others, and has a HUGE bank account. Those are pretty good intelligence stats in my book.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Masbee said:


> Yet you quote PER?
> 
> Win Shares is just using PER type numbers and then attempting to factor in defense and team play, so that you get an idea about a players impact on BOTH ENDS.
> 
> ...


I don't really disagree with your assessment of Outlaw - I am just not a fan of Beri and his work. :whoknows:

Honestly, I am not concerned very much about Travis' defense - it is his weak ballhandling/playmaking that turns me off. (and IMHO makes him a bad choice in the starting five) I believe his current role is pretty much as good as it gets for him.

OTOH, you must admit that some folks here seem to feel some kind of urgency to make a deal involving Travis. While I am OK with trading the kid someday, I don't understand the apparent rush. :thinking2:


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Ed O said:


> You kept getting corrected and then you defined important stats either arbitrarily or nonsensically.
> 
> I think that's schooled on any board.
> 
> Ed O.


Um, no, I didn't, but if makes you feel better to think so, which it clearly does, I'll just laugh.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

PapaG said:


> Um, no, I didn't, but if makes you feel better to think so, which it clearly does, I'll just laugh.



Sorry, but while your defense of Travis was fine, your dissing of Lowry was over-the-top and not very persuasive. While many people might agree that Travis is better than Lowry, very few would agree that Lowry is a worthless bum!


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

NateBishop3 said:


> What does that have to do with anything? I'm not the one making trades. You're not the one making trades. Kevin Pritchard is the GM of the Portland Trail Blazers. If he wants to make a trade, and he wants to get max value, Outlaw would be the most logical choice. It's buy low, sell high. Outlaw was a late first round draft pick. He was signed to a moderate contract. Webster was the 6th pick in the draft, he hasn't even been in the league four years, and we're ready to give up on him. That's bad business.


You and I aren't the one's making trades? Gol dern'd, I are miss the memo 

But if you and I are out of the loop, how in the wide world do you have an accurate bead on what NBA GMs are willing to give up for either? Many Blazer posters on this site will argue that it's Martell with the higher upside. Travis is owed 4M next year with a team option at the same rate the following year... Martell is owed 3.7M next year and can be retained with a 5M qualifying offer after that. And as we've seen countless times before, guys can be low picks can turn into busts or max players and the same is true for lotto guys. Where these two were picked matters in their first contract and is pretty much irrelevant to what their next contract will be.

if you're going to condescendingly nitpick and point out stuff like how you and I don't make the trades, then why say _"he hasn't even been in the league four years, and *we're* ready to give up on him"_... *we* aren't giving up on either guy because *we* aren't KP! *We*, don't win lose draft or trade anyone. *We* are just fans, talking hoops... some more logically then others.

STOMP


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

STOMP said:


> You and I aren't the one's making trades? Gol dern'd, I are miss the memo
> 
> But if you and I are out of the loop, how in the wide world do you have an accurate bead on what NBA GMs are willing to give up for either? Many Blazer posters on this site will argue that it's Martell with the higher upside. Travis is owed 4M next year with a team option at the same rate the following year... Martell is owed 3.7M next year and can be retained with a 5M qualifying offer after that. And as we've seen countless times before, guys can be low picks can turn into busts or max players and the same is true for lotto guys. Where these two were picked matters in their first contract and is pretty much irrelevant to what their next contract will be.
> 
> ...


Ah, but I am not just a fan. I spent three years covering the team. I have worked with Travis Outlaw. I have worked with Martell Webster. I have worked with Kevin Pritchard. 

But the "we" that I spoke of was the fans. Some fans ARE ready to give up on Martell Webster, most of them are probably the same fans that were ready to give up on Travis Outlaw after his third season in the NBA. 

My point is, you are looking at it from a fan's standpoint. I'm trying to look at it from a GM's. Right now Outlaw has high value, the highest he's ever had. Will it get higher or will it diminish because we have so many more guns this season? Buy low and sell high.


----------



## AudieNorris (Jun 29, 2006)

NateBishop3 said:


> Ah, but I am not just a fan. I spent three years covering the team. I have worked with Travis Outlaw. I have worked with Martell Webster. I have worked with Kevin Pritchard.
> 
> But the "we" that I spoke of was the fans. Some fans ARE ready to give up on Martell Webster, most of them are probably the same fans that were ready to give up on Travis Outlaw after his third season in the NBA.
> 
> My point is, you are looking at it from a fan's standpoint. I'm trying to look at it from a GM's. Right now Outlaw has high value, the highest he's ever had. Will it get higher or will it diminish because we have so many more guns this season? Buy low and sell high.


If I were Outlaw (love that), I would never allow a press member to know the "real" me. In fact, I would probably filter just about every detail regarding myself when it came to the press. 

The press doesn't write his check or really do anything for a player. No reason to give more than the bare minimum to the press. So I doubt you know the "real" Travis anymore than what is in the recent o-live vids. 

Plus by calling someone stupid, whether you know them or not, opens the door for the same treatment yourself.


----------



## PDXshelbyGT (May 24, 2007)

Permit me to ask this question (or attempt at looking at this debate from a little different angle):


What improvements to Webster's game could be made to view him as an All Star quality player? [Ok, maybe I'm using "All Star" when I shouldn't be - but just for discussion purposes, allow me to use this term and the qualities and level of play to reach this status in the league.]


What improvements to Outlaw's game could be made to consider him at an All Star-quality level player?



Both are young players. Time will tell which of the two elevates their game; see's their game deminish; or see their game peak where it is today.


With my question, I'm attempting to uncover who has the most realistic prospect of seeing their game rise to huge heights? I'm not asking, "which player is the better fit for THIS team..." because I'm not sure I'd be able to guess until watching Oden and seeing who plays well with him.


What is Webster's (speculatively speaking)potential? Could his defense game elevate where he is both a top defender in the league AND one of the purest shooters in the game? 

What is Outlaw's (speculatively speaking) potential? Could he learn to manage/control his own athletic abilities so as to elevate his game as one of the game's best Slashers, Mid-range shooting monster, top SF shot blocker, rebounder? Should his potential be realized...what exactly could this equate to being? 


With the above questions answered, is it not wise to _keep both players for this coming year _and see/watch which, if not both, mature and elevate to star-status?

Is there truly a player to be had _(realistically - and right now!)_ that would be worth having AND worth risking the Blazers missing out on the opportunity to see Webster's & Outlaw's cake "bake?"

If BOTH were to truly excell and elevate their games to speculative potential - would the Blazers not have two key pieces in a Championship wheel?


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

AudieNorris said:


> If I were Outlaw (love that), I would never allow a press member to know the "real" me. In fact, I would probably filter just about every detail regarding myself when it came to the press.
> 
> The press doesn't write his check or really do anything for a player. No reason to give more than the bare minimum to the press. So I doubt you know the "real" Travis anymore than what is in the recent o-live vids.
> 
> Plus by calling someone stupid, whether you know them or not, opens the door for the same treatment yourself.


And normally you would be right, but I was friends with Travis his rookie year. I spent time at his apartment. I went out drinking with his older brother John a few times. They're good people. Regardless, I was just being honest. I don't know why you're taking offense, but that's your prerogative. I'm just calling it like I see it.


----------



## AudieNorris (Jun 29, 2006)

NateBishop3 said:


> And normally you would be right, but I was friends with Travis his rookie year. I spent time at his apartment. I went out drinking with his older brother John a few times. They're good people. Regardless, I was just being honest. I don't know why you're taking offense, but that's your prerogative. I'm just calling it like I see it.


The fact that you agreed with, and backed up, calling a person "Dumb as a stump" on a public forum doesn't give much legitimacy to your journalistic skills. You claim to know Outlaw but if you really knew him, would you call him what you did?


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

KingSpeed said:


> Kerr is a TERRIBLE comparison. *Travis didn't just hit a couple clutch shots. He was very often our go to guy down the stretch and he delivered. LMA hit a slump a bit during the 2nd half of the season and Outlaw became one of the TWO guys we could go to. He would often carry us in 4th quarters.* Kerr was never a go to guy who could create his own shot. He just hit open shots created by Jordan and Duncan.


With all due respect King, I appreciate your rabid fandom, but your recollection of facts leaves something to be desired. here are the pre and post all-star splits for both LMA and Travis

Aldridge:

```
G	MIN	FGM-FGA	     FG%	3PM-3PA	     3P%	FTM-FTA	     FT%	STL	BLK	TO	PF	OFF	DEF	TOT	AST	PTS
47 	34.4 	7.0-14.6 	48.035 	0.0-0.0 	.000 	2.9-3.9 	75.691 	0.57 	1.28 	1.6 	3.1 	2.7 	4.7 	7.4 	1.3 	17.0
29 	35.9 	8.0-16.3 	48.837 	0.0-0.2 	.200 	3.1-4.0 	76.923 	0.97 	1.17 	1.8 	3.2 	3.2 	4.7 	7.9 	2.1 	19.1
```
Outlaw:

```
G	MIN	FGM-FGA	      [B]FG%[/B]	3PM-3PA	     3P%	FTM-FTA	     FT%	STL	BLK	TO	PF	OFF	DEF	TOT	AST	PTS
52 	26.3 	4.9-11.0 	[B]44.308[/B] 	0.4-1.1 	.397 	2.6-3.7 	70.103 	0.69 	0.77 	1.3 	2.1 	1.2 	3.7 	4.8 	1.3 	12.8
30 	27.1 	5.5-13.1 	[B]41.730[/B] 	0.6-1.4 	.395 	2.7-3.3 	82.000 	0.77 	0.77 	1.4 	2.2 	1.1 	3.0 	4.1 	1.3 	14.2
```
Both Player's points per game went up about the same, but Travis' FG% dropped off noticeably while LMA's stayed pretty much the same, which doesn't deny that Outlaw was at times clutch for us, but the fact remains that he was a much less reliable scorer in the last half of the season than he was in the first half. As for LaMarcus "slumping" I'm not sure where you got that idea; his second half of the season was marked by a him finally getting comfortable with a more "back to the basket" oriented post game vs. the face up perimeter game that he relied on to start the season.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

NateBishop3 said:


> Ah, but I am not just a fan. I spent three years covering the team. I have worked with Travis Outlaw. I have worked with Martell Webster. I have worked with Kevin Pritchard.


wow you covered the team for peanuts and wrote a column while I have only watched pretty much every minute of their NBA careers. How can I possibly have an opinion that measures up to yours on what sort of NBA talents these two are and project to be? How can I possibly understand the complexities of salary considerations? 


> But the "we" that I spoke of was the fans. Some fans ARE ready to give up on Martell Webster, most of them are probably the same fans that were ready to give up on Travis Outlaw after his third season in the NBA.


And one GM was ready to give up on John Nash's other HS lotto pick after just two seasons... so what? Every player and situation is different and there is no one proven/best way to develop talent and build a top team. But having a GM with a good eye for talent and willing to make a bold move based on their beliefs is my preferred method.

the roster is overflowing with talented young players... if trades/injuries don't happen, talented guys are going to be pushed out of minutes, and those guys are going to probably lose trade value. I'm expecting several unhappy campers this year... I won't blame them.


> My point is, you are looking at it from a fan's standpoint. I'm trying to look at it from a GM's.


Ha ha ha! Dude you are rich. Watch this, I can be condescending too.... I've been a basketball freak from NC playing and watching hoops a lot longer then you've been alive and you think I'm going to kneel down to your judgement because you once held a mike while KP was talking? Dude, I've read your articles... and NBA management type you are not.

hey remember when you wrote this for hoopsworld back when you had that all important player access?

_"It's all about the future in Portland right now. Everyone sees a team that will be a real force in three or four years, IF they're kept together. There are a few things, however, that are the future in the here and now. Martell Webster isn't ready to show the league why the Trail Blazers selected him 6th overall three years from now, he's ready now."_ 

recalling that scary good roster helps the humor about your GM mindset claim set in... I can promise you I was definitely not a part of the _"Everyone"_ you were speaking of... thank goodness we have a GM smart enough not to have kept that crappy roster together. Despite only being a fan watching an inordinate amount of hoops, somehow I thought every major decision Nash made was at least questionable (Telfair) and some were downright horrible (Sheed trade, passing on Paul to draft MW & JJ). Conversely, I've approved to applauded every major move that KP has made... even the Zach trade. There is a record of this right here on BBF


> Right now Outlaw has high value, the highest he's ever had. Will it get higher or will it diminish because we have so many more guns this season? Buy low and sell high.


I'm with you on the premise here, but the conclusion to trade him because he's improving makes little sense if you project him to continue to improve. Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I'm sure that the guys in question hold different value in the eyes of the league's various GMs just like they do in the eyes of various posters....there are possibilities I'd support. But I project Travis to end up a much better pro then Martell. Besides that, KP has already assembled more then enough talent in Portland to win. Wise pruning may be the best call. If he's going to add another main cog, it will probably come via a trade next off season utilizing the much talked about cap-space where more $$$ are coming in then going out. Portland's only real positional question mark is SF and Travis and/or Martell seem obvious centerpieces to what Portland would be sending out to the team losing it's high priced 3.

There I go thinking about things from a fan's standpoint again...

STOMP


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

STOMP said:


> wow you covered the team for peanuts and wrote a column while I have only watched pretty much every minute of their NBA careers. How can I possibly have an opinion that measures up to yours on what sort of NBA talents these two are and project to be? How can I possibly understand the complexities of salary considerations?
> 
> And one GM was ready to give up on John Nash's other HS lotto pick after just two seasons... so what? Every player and situation is different and there is no one proven/best way to develop talent and build a top team. But having a GM with a good eye for talent and willing to make a bold move based on their beliefs is my preferred method.
> 
> ...


I apologize for being condescending.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Jayps15 said:


> Your original quote of Coach Demopoulos is wrong, he said when speaking of Outlaw 'he is one of the good..[pause] great young clutch players in the league' with an emphasis on young, as in he's still got a long way to go. He also said it was almost like having a big 4 late in games with Outlaw, it certainly wasn't putting him on the same level as Roy, Oden, Aldridge in terms of overall game/value.
> 
> And like someone else pointed out, he can say what he wants about Travis just like Nate said Green was going to win us 2-4 games last season but coach praising one of his own players has to be taken with a large grain of salt.


But Travis DID win us games. Green didn't, but Travis DID. Won us at least 5 games. There's no comparison. He's talking about a proven commodity.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

nikolokolus said:


> With all due respect King, I appreciate your rabid fandom, but your recollection of facts leaves something to be desired. here are the pre and post all-star splits for both LMA and Travis
> 
> Aldridge:
> 
> ...



There were "times" when Outlaw was the 2nd best player on our team. When all we could do was either give the ball to Outlaw or Roy. I'm not dissing LMA. I love him. But there were times when Outlaw was our 2nd option at the end of games.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

I was hoping that people would respond "We haven't deserted Outlaw!" but it appears that many of you have. Crazy.

Go Blazers! All of 'em.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

KingSpeed said:


> I was hoping that people would respond "We haven't deserted Outlaw!" but it appears that many of you have. Crazy.
> 
> Go Blazers! All of 'em.


I don;t even pay attention to other posters' opinions 90% of the time. They are almost always wrong (not according to me, but reality). I supported Travis and Martell when everyone was bashing on them before last year. 

It's really quite sad how little this board knows about basketball. The majority blasted the Z-Bo trade, for stupid reasons. They wanted to cut Travis, trade him for Mike Miller, get rid of Webster, annoint Jack as the next Chauncey Billups.

I come here because it's a very active place that posts recent NEWS and INSIDER videos, blogs, audios...

The speculation and predictions are a waste of time.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

NateBishop3 said:


> I apologize for being condescending.


cool... I apologize as well because in general I do read/consider your (and most everyone's) opinion here and appreciate that there are other Bball junkies to chat with. Debating players and the direction of the club is what we do and you are a quality poster who I always read. 

:cheers:

STOMP


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Oldmangrouch said:


> I don't really disagree with your assessment of Outlaw - I am just not a fan of Beri and his work. :whoknows:
> 
> Honestly, I am not concerned very much about Travis' defense - it is his weak ballhandling/playmaking that turns me off. (and IMHO makes him a bad choice in the starting five) I believe his current role is pretty much as good as it gets for him.
> 
> OTOH, you must admit that some folks here seem to feel some kind of urgency to make a deal involving Travis. While I am OK with trading the kid someday, I don't understand the apparent rush. :thinking2:


Ok, cool. I understand. I don't like Beri's work either.

The win shares I was using came from Basketball Reference.com and are not Beri's numbers. They are playing off the work of Bill James and Dean Oliver.

My bad for failing clarify. Here is the explanation for the numbers.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

KingSpeed said:


> I was hoping that people would respond "We haven't deserted Outlaw!" but it appears that many of you have. Crazy.
> 
> Go Blazers! All of 'em.


Things change. Don't get overly attached because Outlaw could end up somewhere else just like Jack. Unlike Jack, Outlaw does have some decent ability though. I hope he sticks around for a couple more years, but we are going to come to a bit of a minutes crunch sometime soon.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

*yoink*


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Nearly every championship team has at least one defensive stopper--a guy you can put on any player 2-4 who is killing you. who is that guy on our team? it sure isn't Webster or Outlaw. Bayless may prove to be that guy for the guard positions, but when we're contending most likely we'll be seeing a fair amount of LeBron James in the finals and Kobe Bryant in the WCF. Who is supposed to cover those two guys? 

We clearly need a defensive-minded small forward in the long-term. Somebody in the Marion/Prince/Artest/Bowen/Battier/Kirilenko/Bell mold.

Between Outlaw and Webster, I prefer Outlaw. But I'd rather trade either, or both, for a young player in that mold.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

KingSpeed said:


> There were "times" when Outlaw was the 2nd best player on our team. When all we could do was either give the ball to Outlaw or Roy. I'm not dissing LMA. I love him. But there were times when Outlaw was our 2nd option at the end of games.


I'm not arguing that Travis is worthless, but I think you're making the mistake of overvaluing his contributions to this team.

As for someone being the "second best player on the team" you could say the same thing about Jarret Jack, Channing Frye, and even Martell Webster at times last season; each of those guys had their moments but that doesn't make them indispensable or irreplaceable. The fact remains that it's more about performing at a high level *consistently*, and we haven't seen a full season of Travis performing at a consistently high level ... in fact he did the exact opposite of what you would want to see, he got worse as the season wore on, not better.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

KingSpeed said:


> I was hoping that people would respond "We haven't deserted Outlaw!" but it appears that many of you have. Crazy.
> 
> Go Blazers! All of 'em.


How you can whine about other people abandoning Travis when you have a Rudy avatar is beyond me.


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

> Nearly every championship team has at least one defensive stopper--a guy you can put on any player 2-4 who is killing you. who is that guy on our team? it sure isn't Webster or Outlaw. Bayless may prove to be that guy for the guard positions, but when we're contending most likely we'll be seeing a fair amount of LeBron James in the finals and Kobe Bryant in the WCF. Who is supposed to cover those two guys?
> 
> We clearly need a defensive-minded small forward in the long-term. Somebody in the Marion/Prince/Artest/Bowen/Battier/Kirilenko/Bell mold.
> 
> Between Outlaw and Webster, I prefer Outlaw. But I'd rather trade either, or both, for a young player in that mold.


Yeah, man. That is a very good point. Hopefully by the time we see someone like LeBron (so in the finals since he is in the east) we will have Batum ready and see how he is on D. This kid might be the guy we all want, but he may be not. I don't think we should wait for him, but having him in the wings and continually developing under our coaching staffs guidance is nice to think about.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Masbee said:


> Ok, cool. I understand. I don't like Beri's work either.
> 
> The win shares I was using came from Basketball Reference.com and are not Beri's numbers. They are playing off the work of Bill James and Dean Oliver.
> 
> ...



OK, now we're on the same page. Thanks for the explanation. :greatjob:


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

KingSpeed said:


> I was hoping that people would respond "We haven't deserted Outlaw!" but it appears that many of you have. Crazy.
> 
> Go Blazers! All of 'em.


Nobody has deserted him. But some of us have a little more critical view of him. You're a very emotional fan. That's great. We need that kind of fan as well. But there are some of us who go by more than just feelings. 

Outlaw is an okay player. He shoots pretty well and he seems to be very clutch. He also seems like a good guy. His defense is below average and he doesn't help his team win as often as some seem to think. He doesn't rebound well for his position and he stops the offensive flow because he shoots so much outside the rhythm of the offense. 

In a lot of ways, that describes Damon Stoudamire. I didn't like him either.


----------

