# Blazers offer Outlaw for Memphis PG?



## Tortimer

I really don't believe this but rotoworld is reporting the following:

Travis Outlaw-F-Trail Blazers Aug. 25 - 11:57 am et 

The Trailblazers have reportedly offered to trade Travis Outlaw to the Grizzlies in exchange for a point guard.

Mike Conley is likely off limits, and the Grizzlies are inclined to keep Kyle Lowry for his toughness and defensive ability. The Blazers might be willing to take Javaris Crittenton, but more likely they would beef up the offer to land Conley or Lowry. This also raises doubts about Portland's confidence in Steve Blake, and confirms that they don't view Jerryd Bayless --whose passing has never been his strong suit-- as the point guard of the future.
Source: Memphis Edge 


here is a link: http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=nba&id=949


----------



## taterz

Im calling BS. TO>>>Crittenton, and we dont need any more G's


----------



## hasoos

Actually, it doesn't confirm anything. Because it is just a rumor, and it is well known Memphis has coveted Outlaw since he hit that game winning shot against them last year, as has some of the Memphis press. I believe this is just another one of those press generated buzz rumors.


----------



## alext42083

Good luck with that Memphis, and even Kyle Lowry is off limits for Travis Outlaw? lol. That writer at Memphis Edge is a joke..


----------



## MrJayremmie

This is way off, imo. We don't need another guard.


----------



## c_note

I got a good chuckle out of this.


----------



## andalusian

Hmm... Outlaw for OJ Mayo... (he did play a little bit of PG for them in Summer League).


----------



## Ed O

People on this board tend to vastly overrate Outlaw, who's not even a starter in the NBA yet. With that being said, even assuming the rumor has validity, we all know that Pritch is a constant communicator, and mere conversation doesn't mean anything would come of it.

Ed O.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy

I dont get this, and think it is BS. We DONT NEED A TRUE PG, as long as Roy is here. A future 3 guard rotation of Bayless/Rudy/Roy will provide more than enough distribution skills.


----------



## Boob-No-More

Ed O said:


> People on this board tend to vastly overrate Outlaw, who's not even a starter in the NBA yet.


Neither is Kyle Lowry or Javaris Crittenton. 



Ed O said:


> With that being said, even assuming the rumor has validity, we all know that Pritch is a constant communicator, and mere conversation doesn't mean anything would come of it.


I don't think this rumor has anything to do with Kevin Pritchard. I think it's just a writer filling column space. Trading Outlaw for one of Memphis' PGs made sense back when these rumors originally surfaced before the draft when we had a surplus of small forwards and Memphis had a surplus of PGs. Since the original rumors were floated, we added Jerryd Bayless through the draft and lost James Jones to Miami through free agency. Sure, we also added Batum through the draft, but he's not ready to contribute. So, that leaves most of the minutes at SF to be split between Webster and Outlaw. If we trade Outlaw that means either big minutes for Batum or playing a LOT of the three-guard line-up. I don't like either scenario. 

Memphis is known to covet Outlaw, and still has a surplus of young PGs, but we no longer have a need - especially for Javaris Crittenton, who is not a "pure", PG. He's a combo guard in the Jarrett Jack, Jerryd Bayless mold. We traded one to get the other and considered it an upgrade. I see no reason to add yet another combo guard in Crittenton. Lowry doesn't give us anything we need. He's undersized and isn't exactly a pass-first PG. I'd rather stick with Blake and Bayless than add either Lowry or Crittenton.

BNM


----------



## stupendous

Ha! Thanks for the laugh. We don't need more help at PG right now, and Outlaw is a key piece of our second unit and longterm plans.

Unless it is Conley, I cant imagine this having any validity.


----------



## Ed O

Boob-No-More said:


> Neither is Kyle Lowry or Javaris Crittenton.


That's true (although Lowry started more games in his two year career than Outlaw has started the last two seasons AND Lowry and Crittenton are each markedly younger than Outlaw)... but is anyone claiming that Outlaw wouldn't be enough to get either of these players?

If Memphis (or other) fans were hyping them up as nearly untouchable (as some Blazers fans inexplicably do with Outlaw) then I would use the same argument against them. 



> I don't think this rumor has anything to do with Kevin Pritchard. I think it's just a writer filling column space.
> 
> ...
> 
> Memphis is known to covet Outlaw ...


I don't understand why people easily dismiss one rumor as "just filling column space" but then rely on rumors to support that another team "covets" a Blazer.

Seems pretty inconsistent to me.

Ed O.


----------



## Rat

*No*

Pritch has too much on his plate right now with all the new players. He has a limited idea of how the chemistry is going to work out with 
Bayless, Fernandez, Blake, Sergio, Webster, and Roy. That chemistry is potentially very complex. What if Rudy or Jerryd explode? What if one of them ends up playing well with Brandon? What if Sergio's fast paced style suddenly becomes exactly what the chemistry needs with all our athletes? Lots of stuff could happen; or not.

He needs time for a few things to develop and shake out, for the cake to bake, before making a major investment in an "icing on the cake" guy.

It would be stupid to invest in a PG right now, especially if it resulted in trading a player like Outlaw who just might have a great year (which would improve his trade value even more, obviously). How much better than Blake would any free agent be anyway?

KP is not stupid, however. No way he makes that trade. Think about it. This sounds like the typical false rumor you hear about the Blazers. These rumors always seem to involve Portland giving up a major piece of their team. It's wishful thinking by non Blazer people, and not in the Blazers' best interest.


----------



## PorterIn2004

_If_ Prichard is starting to envision Roy and/or Fernandez playing SF a bunch or _if_ there's another trade lined up (such as moving LaFrentz for a SF), it might make some sense to move a SF. Otherwise, though, it seems to me the list of possible PGs (Blake, Roy, Bayless, Rodriguez and _maybe_ Fernandez) is roughly balanced with the list of possible SFs (Webster, Outlaw, Roy, Batum, and again _maybe_ Fernandez). Thus, why mess with it?


----------



## crowTrobot

andalusian said:


> Hmm... Outlaw for OJ Mayo... (he did play a little bit of PG for them in Summer League).



as memphis fans burn their arena to the ground.


----------



## Ed O

*Re: No*



Rat said:


> KP is not stupid, however. No way he makes that trade. Think about it. This sounds like the typical false rumor you hear about the Blazers. These rumors always seem to involve Portland giving up a major piece of their team. It's wishful thinking by non Blazer people, and not in the Blazers' best interest.


You've defined what YOU think "stupid" is and then concluded that, since Pritchard isn't stupid, he couldn't possibly make a deal like this.

I disagree.

There is no cake to let bake. There is no big "wait and see" push. We have three key, core players in Roy, Oden, and Aldridge. In my opinion we should always be looking to get better and moving a backup small forward for a younger backup at the PG spot that might be a starter for us down the road can make a lot of sense.

The question to me is not whether we ought to make a deal or not--of course we ought to make a deal that has positive net present value. 

The question is whether any of the Memphis PGs are good enough to provide more value to the team than Outlaw is going to provide. I'm definitely less sure of that in this case.

Ed O.


----------



## Boob-No-More

Ed O said:


> I don't understand why people easily dismiss one rumor as "just filling column space" but then rely on rumors to support that another team "covets" a Blazer.
> 
> Seems pretty inconsistent to me.


Not inconsistent at all. You need to consider the source of the rumors. The original Outlaw to Memphis rumor was confirmed and commented on my Mike Barrett and Mike Rice, and it was their on-air comments about Memphis wanting Outlaw that lead to my "Memphis covets Outlaw" comment.

This latest rumor is from Memphis Edge - a blog site where anyone can post anything they want. Most of the articles are written, without pay, by fans like us.

Although they are on the Blazers payroll, and that comes with its own agenda and bias, I consider Mike Barrett and Mike Rice more relaible sources of information concerning the team than some unpaid blogger on the Memphis Edge site.

BNM


----------



## Tortimer

I could see this being a true rumor if this was made before the draft but not now. I like Conley but he hasn't proved anything and would be a big risk to trade for. I'm not even sure Conley will end up a better PG then Bayless. I'm not overrating Outlaw even though I do like his game for a 6th man. I just can't see KP make this offer right now with the way the team is looking. I do think it would take more then Outlaw if we are talking about trading for Conley but for the Blazers right now Outlaw would be more important IMO.


----------



## MrJayremmie

I like Bayless as a prospect more than _any_ of Memphis's PGs, including Conley, for our team.

I think this is a rumor just because KP knows how much Outlaw means to this team, and the chemistry the guys have with him, and stuff like what Dean Demopolis said about a "big 4" with Outlaw. That, bundled with the fact that we really don't need a PG, and we really have a full backcourt already, makes no sense to trade a SF that we need for a G that we don't need. That is my opinion on this matter.

But some of this article seems like speculation because all it said was Outlaw was offered for a Memhpis PG and didn't go from there. And they are speculating further that we are offering Outlaw for the unknown PG becuause we don't view Bayless as a PG of the future, or don't have faith in Steve Blake, etc.

It may be possible, though, that KP feels that Rudy can take the role of the spark off the bench for this team, and Outlaw may be expendable now. Just from the time that this rumor came out (right after the Olympics).


----------



## Ed O

Boob-No-More said:


> Not inconsistent at all. You need to consider the source of the rumors. The original Outlaw to Memphis rumor was confirmed and commented on my Mike Barrett and Mike Rice, and it was their on-air comments about Memphis wanting Outlaw that lead to my "Memphis covets Outlaw" comment.
> 
> This latest rumor is from Memphis Edge - a blog site where anyone can post anything they want. Most of the articles are written, without pay, by fans like us.
> 
> Although they are on the Blazers payroll, and that comes with its own agenda and bias, I consider Mike Barrett and Mike Rice more relaible sources of information concerning the team than some unpaid blogger on the Memphis Edge site.


I think you're a bit confused about the source.

Ronald Tillery is a Grizzlies beat writer... according to his bio he's the only one in Memphis. He writes for the Memphis Commercial Appeal.

Whether the majority of the info comes from unpaid fans or not (I don't get that impression, looking at the site, but I didn't look carefully) THIS report did not come from a fan--unpaid or otherwise.

Ed O.


----------



## PapaG

Excerpted from the Tillery piece.



> $$ Portland has been calling. The Trail Blazers want a point guard and are willing to part with Travis Outlaw (Starkville native) to get a floor general from the Griz. It’s probably more likely that the Blazers would want Conley — and not Kyle Lowry — in this scenario because Conley is the purest point guard in the bunch and Portland could pull off a reunion with former teammate Greg Oden.
> 
> *If that’s the case, the Griz would need more than Outlaw in return.* But I don’t believe trading Conley is a wise move. Trading Conley would put the Griz back at square one, again searching for a dynamic point guard to compensate for the loss of the GOOD Jason Williams.


If Blazer fans are "overvaluing" Outlaw, this writer is (A) undervaluing Outlaw and, (B) obviously a bit confused on how the CBA works in terms of trades and how that applies to a Conley deal.

As for the "overvaluing" theory proposed earlier, how is it that one of the best scorers off the bench in the entire league, a guy who also makes only $4m per, is "overvalued"? My worry with Outlaw being traded is that because of his low contract value, it is almost impossible to get similar production in return short of altering the roster by adding more players to a deal. At his contract value, it seems as if it is pretty much impossible to "overvalue" him.


----------



## meru

Didn't Conley play in Summer League and look distinctly underwhelming? I seem to remember some such. In particular, isn't the worry on him that he can't shoot? Plus he's small?


----------



## PorterIn2004

Here's a crazy thought -- what if Pritchard already has a trade lined-up that involved LaFrentz _and_ one of Blake, Bayless, or Rodriguez that's bringing back a stud SF? Maybe it's even sewn up but we haven't heard about it yet because the trade can't be made official yet. Regardless, _if_ there's something like that in the works, then it absolutely makes sense for Pritchard to move a SF for another PG.


----------



## PapaG

PorterIn2004 said:


> Here's a crazy thought -- what if Pritchard already has a trade lined-up that involved LaFrentz _and_ one of Blake, Bayless, or Rodriguez that's bringing back a stud SF? Maybe it's even sewn up but we haven't heard about it yet because the trade can't be made official yet. Regardless, _if_ there's something like that in the works, then it absolutely makes sense for Pritchard to move a SF for another PG.



That makes sense, or at least more sense than my own crazy thought that Pritchard now sees Rudy as a viable option as a swing SF on the second unit, rendering Outlaw expendable.

Of course, if that were the case, trading Webster for a PG makes more sense, but if Outlaw can (allegedly) only fetch a Lowry or a Crittendon straight up, I shudder to think what Martell would fetch from one of the worst teams in the league.


----------



## hasoos

meru said:


> Didn't Conley play in Summer League and look distinctly underwhelming? I seem to remember some such. In particular, isn't the worry on him that he can't shoot? Plus he's small?


I am just wondering why you are judging the guy on summer league play when he played in the NBA regular season last year, and did really well towards the end of the season. The longer it went on, the better he played.


----------



## Zuca

Honestly, if it's about dealing for a good SF, your team should talk with Hawks about Marvin Williams. They need another big body in order to allow Josh Smith to play more minutes at SF.

Frye (who your team may not resign due to better offers) with Outlaw (or Webster) for Marvin Williams (who is better than Outlaw, despite what some people say) and Solomon Jones (useful for a third-stringer, and free more PT for Diogu).

And if your team get a good run to the playoffs and Atlanta struggles, your team can also try to deal in the trade deadline for Bibby (expiring contract)... Lafrentz and Blake (perhaps a 2nd rounder) for him.


----------



## Ed O

PapaG said:


> If Blazer fans are "overvaluing" Outlaw, this writer is (A) undervaluing Outlaw and, (B) obviously a bit confused on how the CBA works in terms of trades and how that applies to a Conley deal.


Maybe (A) but not necessarily (B). He didn't write they would need to include more SALARY. Just more. Maybe Koponen, or a future first, to go with Outlaw. 



> As for the "overvaluing" theory proposed earlier, how is it that one of the best scorers off the bench in the entire league, a guy who also makes only $4m per, is "overvalued"? My worry with Outlaw being traded is that because of his low contract value, it is almost impossible to get similar production in return short of altering the roster by adding more players to a deal. At his contract value, it seems as if it is pretty much impossible to "overvalue" him.


I don't understand this logic at all. There are plenty of players in the NBA--many on their rookie deals still--who make $4m or less and are far better prospects than Outlaw.

I'm really not worried about the production that the Blazers might (or might not) get following a deal for Outlaw. I'm more concerned with the long term and getting a very good PG prospect in the fold makes more sense to me than hanging onto a backup small forward.

As for Travis being "one of the best scorers off the bench in the entire league"... I think it's that sort of thinking that gets Blazers fans all bent out of joint at the thought of trading him. If he's that good of a player, he should have been starting for the Blazers last year. Or the year before.

Ed O.


----------



## PapaG

hasoos said:


> I am just wondering why you are judging the guy on summer league play when he played in the NBA regular season last year, and did really well towards the end of the season. The longer it went on, the better he played.


He is a terrible outside shooter. Barely 30% from 19'9" in college and even worse in the pros.

Oden, and, to a lesser extent, Daequan Cook and Ron Lewis made him look like a lottery pick. The reality is he is much closer to a slightly slower and slightly taller version of Sebastian Telfair.


----------



## PapaG

Ed O said:


> *I don't understand this logic at all.* There are plenty of players in the NBA--many on their rookie deals still--who make $4m or less and *are far better prospects than Outlaw.*
> 
> Ed O.


You don't understand because you aren't comprehending what I wrote. I was referencing current production, not what someone may or may not do down the road.

Hence, at $4mil/per, it's tough to say that Outlaw is "overvalued" when looking at it through a production prism, even more so when it is clear that he is finally proving himself to be a solid NBA player who can be (natch, already is) a primary scoring option at the end of basketball games.

A Travis Outlaw for Kyle Lowrey deal, straight up, would be an embarrassment for Pritchard and an absolute steal for Memphis.


----------



## World B. Free

LOL yeah right. We are WAY better off with Outlaw. We do not need another PG. Blake is fine.


----------



## Ed O

PapaG said:


> You don't understand because you aren't comprehending what I wrote. I was referencing current production, not what someone may or may not do down the road.


I addressed that the paragraph after the one you quoted.



> Hence, at $4mil/per, it's tough to say that Outlaw is "overvalued" when looking at it through a production prism, even more so when it is clear that he is finally proving himself to be a solid NBA player who can be (natch, already is) a primary scoring option at the end of basketball games.


The production of a bench player simply isn't that big of a factor to the team's future. The production that makes him a "solid NBA player" has not been enough to get him a regular starting gig on some bad Blazers teams and hasn't earned him more than 30 mpg in any of his five NBA seasons. 



> A Travis Outlaw for Kyle Lowrey deal, straight up, would be an embarrassment for Pritchard and an absolute steal for Memphis.


I'm not sure that it would make sense for Portland to do that deal or not, but I don't think it would be anything resembling an "embarrassment". Lowry might already be a better player at a position of scarcity... and he's a year and a half younger.

Ed O.


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> You don't understand because you aren't comprehending what I wrote. I was referencing current production, not what someone may or may not do down the road.
> 
> Hence, at $4mil/per, it's tough to say that Outlaw is "overvalued" when looking at it through a production prism, even more so when it is clear that he is finally proving himself to be a solid NBA player who can be (natch, already is) *a primary scoring option at the end of basketball games.
> 
> A Travis Outlaw for Kyle Lowrey deal, straight up, would be an embarrassment for Pritchard and an absolute steal for Memphis.*


Primary scoring option? No, hes not. To say trading Outlaw for Lowrey would be an embarrassment shows you overvalue him.


----------



## PapaG

Ed O said:


> *The production of a bench player simply isn't that big of a factor to the team's future.*


When that player is on the court at the end of close games, and making plays to win those close games, then that player is a factor in the team's present and future.



> The production that makes him a "solid NBA player" has not been enough to get him a regular starting gig on some bad Blazers teams and hasn't earned him more than 30 mpg in any of his five NBA seasons.


The reason Travis did not start last year is because of Martell Webster, but then notice who plays at the end of the game. Plus, outside of Outlaw and James Jones for half the year, there was no consistency off the bench.



> I'm not sure that it would make sense for Portland to do that deal or not, but I don't think it would be anything resembling an "embarrassment". Lowry might already be a better player at a position of scarcity... and he's a year and a half younger.
> 
> Ed O.


He "might already be" a better player? How so? He's a 6' PG who can't pass, shoot, or defend, and he'd be on a team that has Brandon Roy with the ball in his hands at the end of games.

Also, I'm not seeing much overvaluing of Outlaw on this board, as it's not like the majority see him as untouchable (nor should they), but I am seeing a lot of undervaluing of him in your posts. 


In what universe is Kyle Lowry, a mediocre bench player for a very bad team, a better player than Travis Outlaw?


----------



## TLo

If we're talking about players of roughly equal abilities you should *never *trade big for small. That is why this story is BS.


----------



## PapaG

R-Star said:


> *Primary scoring option? No, hes not*. To say trading Outlaw for Lowrey would be an embarrassment shows you overvalue him.


Yes, he is. You posting this shows you don't watch the Blazers.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EzckjCIzlO4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EzckjCIzlO4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

"Coach asked me if I wanted the shot." 

That is a "primary scoring option" at the end of a game.

Trading him straight up for Kyle Lowry is an absolute joke.

"Mr. 4th Quarter"

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R2Z4nxdjpnE&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R2Z4nxdjpnE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


----------



## Ed O

PapaG said:


> The reason Travis did not start last year is because of Martell Webster, but then notice who plays at the end of the game. Plus, outside of Outlaw and James Jones for half the year, there was no consistency off the bench.


Ah. So he didn't start because of Webster, but he's better than Martell. And he didn't start because we needed "stability" from our bench.

Man. What a weird world you must occupy to think that coaches are always keeping their good players off the court.



> He "might already be" a better player? How so? He's a 6' PG who can't pass, shoot, or defend, and he'd be on a team that has Brandon Roy with the ball in his hands at the end of games.


He can't defend, huh? Sorry, dude. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to Lowry.



> Also, I'm not seeing much overvaluing of Outlaw on this board, as it's not like the majority see him as untouchable (nor should they), but I am seeing a lot of undervaluing of him in your posts.


You are, huh?

Please give a SINGLE link where I've advocated trading Outlaw for anything specific. I would love to see it.



> In what universe is Kyle Lowry, a mediocre bench player for a very bad team, a better player than Travis Outlaw?


His PER was 18.3 as a rookie (in a small sample size) and 14.3 last year... not quite up to Outlaw's, but Lowry is (by many people, although clearly not by you) as a good defensive player, and I don't think that anyone would say the same about Outlaw.

Given their similar PER numbers and Lowry's superior defense, I think my statement that "Lowry might already be a better player at a position of scarcity... and he's a year and a half younger." is pretty accurate.

Ed O.


----------



## PapaG

Ed O said:


> Ah. So he didn't start because of Webster, but he's better than Martell. Ed O.



Correct. He's the one playing when the game is on the line, so clearly Nate has more confidence in him.

Arguing that Webster is more valuable than Outlaw is hysterical to me. Watch the end of games. :lol:


----------



## R-Star

I've been over this before, I wont waste my time with it. A guy whos had a couple big fourth quarters is not a primary scoring option. Its not up for debate. Hes not a primary scoring option. Sorry that you dont understand that, but its pretty plain to see.


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> Correct. He's the one playing when the game is on the line, so clearly Nate has more confidence in him.
> 
> Arguing that Webster is more valuable than Outlaw is hysterical to me. Watch the end of games. :lol:


Glad you decided to only answer a fraction of his post.


----------



## Sug

I think people do overvalue TO, but I am probably one of those people. In other words I am aware of my TO love. That said, if you could get Conley for TO I would do it.


----------



## Ed O

PapaG said:


> Correct. He's the one playing when the game is on the line, so clearly Nate has more confidence in him.
> 
> Arguing that Webster is more valuable than Outlaw is hysterical to me. Watch the end of games. :lol:


Do you get words confused on purpose, or are you incapable of discerning nuances in the English language?

I'm not arguing about value when I discuss whether he starts or not. You bringing it up is a straw man.

Webster starts, and has started, presumably because Nate believes he is a better player. There is NO REASON that McMillan could not both start Outlaw AND have him finish games... in fact, most good players in the NBA do both of those things.

Outlaw has, undoubtedly, hit a couple big shots for the Blazers. That's great. He still hasn't been good enough to start more than a handful of games as a Blazer, and he has a player who's a couple of years younger than he starting ahead of him.

Ed O.


----------



## PapaG

Ed O said:


> His PER was 18.3 as a rookie (in a small sample size) and 14.3 last year... not quite up to Outlaw's, but Lowry is (by many people, although clearly not by you) as a good defensive player, and I don't think that anyone would say the same about Outlaw.
> 
> Given their similar PER numbers and Lowry's superior defense, I think my statement that "Lowry might already be a better player at a position of scarcity... and he's a year and a half younger." is pretty accurate.
> 
> Ed O.


Lowry is such a great player that he doesn't start on a horrible team, a team that drafted Mike Conley Jr. one year after drafting Lowry in the first round, and he is so spectacular on defense that he "led", from the bench, the defense of the 3rd worst defensive team in the league in terms of PPG and *THE WORST defensive team in the league in terms of OPP FG%*.

As for "position of scarcity", clearly SF is a position of scarcity on this team since Webster has proven unreliable in the clutch and Roy basically takes over at the point late in games. 

Lowry can't start in Memphis, he is a role player on a bad team who didn't get minutes until the roster was blown up last season, and yet he is a better player than Outlaw.

Wow


----------



## PapaG

R-Star said:


> Glad you decided to only answer a fraction of his post.



Thank you for telling me you are glad I decided to only answer a fraction of his post.


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> Lowry is such a great player that he doesn't start on a horrible team, a team that drafted Mike Conley Jr. one year after drafting Lowry in the first round, and he is so spectacular on defense that he "led", from the bench, the defense of the 3rd worst defensive team in the league in terms of PPG and *THE WORST defensive team in the league in terms of OPP FG%*.
> 
> As for "position of scarcity", clearly SF is a position of scarcity on this team since Webster has proven unreliable in the clutch and Roy basically takes over at the point late in games.
> 
> Lowry can't start in Memphis, he is a role player on a bad team who didn't get minutes until the roster was blown up last season, and yet he is a better player than Outlaw.
> 
> Wow



One of your knocks on Lowry is that hes a bench player? Classic.


----------



## Ed O

PapaG said:


> Wow


Indeed. Your posts are getting more and more random. I don't even know how to react to your unstructured "points".

Ed O.


----------



## Sug

Ed O and Papa G need to head for the Freemont Bridge. Each can hook a 10lb weight to their sack, and toss it over the side. The first to jump is the loser.


----------



## PapaG

Ed O said:


> Webster starts, and has started, presumably because Nate believes he is a better player. *There is NO REASON that McMillan could not both start Outlaw AND have him finish games*... in fact, most good players in the NBA do both of those things.
> 
> 
> Ed O.



I guess that Michael Finley is a better player than Manu Ginobli.

You saying there is NO REASON that some players start and some players come of the bench other than who is deemed better shows a serious flaw in your basketball IQ.

Did you play basketball? Because if you did, you would know that finishing is way more important than starting.


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> Thank you for telling me you are glad I decided to only answer a fraction of his post.


Im under the assumtion you had no answer for the rest of his post.


----------



## PapaG

Ed O said:


> Indeed. Your posts are getting more and more random. I don't even know how to react to your unstructured "points".
> 
> Ed O.


My point is that trading Travis Outlaw for Kyle Lowry is an embarrassment. I made this clear a long time ago. The fact that you decided to argue against this point, at length, to seemingly gain a concession from me (which won't come, by the way), seems a "you" problem.

Kyle Lowry for Travis Outlaw. :lol:


----------



## PapaG

R-Star said:


> Im under the assumtion you had no answer for the rest of his post.



Thank you for assuming that of which you don't know. Make a mistake early in a rebuttal, I don't read the rest of the rebuttal. Also, reply to a post of mine, I will reply to the parts that pertain to what my point was.


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> Lowry is such a great player that he doesn't start on a horrible team, a team that drafted Mike Conley Jr. one year after drafting Lowry in the first round, and he is so spectacular on defense that he "led", from the bench, the defense of the 3rd worst defensive team in the league in terms of PPG and *THE WORST defensive team in the league in terms of OPP FG%*.
> 
> As for "position of scarcity", clearly SF is a position of scarcity on this team since Webster has proven unreliable in the clutch and Roy basically takes over at the point late in games.
> 
> Lowry can't start in Memphis, he is a role player on a bad team who didn't get minutes until the roster was blown up last season, and yet he is a better player than Outlaw.
> 
> Wow


Weren't you the one arguing that there's a reason people come off the bench?


----------



## R-Star

Maybe Memphis will sweeten the pot. Im sure they'd love a "Primary scoring option" on the team.

Ha.


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> Thank you for assuming that of which you don't know. Make a mistake early in a rebuttal, I don't read the rest of the rebuttal. Also, reply to a post of mine, I will reply to the parts that pertain to what my point was.


Weak sidestep.


----------



## PapaG

R-Star said:


> I've been over this before, I wont waste my time with it. A guy whos had a couple big fourth quarters is not a primary scoring option. *Its not up for debate. Hes not a primary scoring option. *Sorry that you dont understand that, but its pretty plain to see.



You'd better let Nate in on this pearl since he is the one putting the ball in Outlaw's hands at the end of games.


----------



## PapaG

R-Star said:


> Weak sidestep.


Thank you for posting weak sidestep.


----------



## BlazerFan22

I might consider this deal if Memphis was willing to trade Conley. I'm not so sure Outlaw has the dribbleing skills to play out on the wing anyway. Outlaw plays more like a PF in a SF body.


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> You'd better let Nate in on this pearl since he is the one putting the ball in Outlaw's hands at the end of games.


Yea, except hes not. Outlaw has had a *FEW* big shots in the 4th. Its like talking with a gradeschooler. A few shots does not equal "Mr 4th quarter". A few clutch shots doesnt equal a primary scoring option. I fail to see what you're missing here.


----------



## Minstrel

PapaG said:


> Lowry is such a great player that he doesn't start on a horrible team


Whereas Outlaw is such a great player, as evidenced by the fact he can't start on varyingly bad teams.

Of course, Outlaw is blocked by a star, right? Hard to be better than a guy like Martell Webster.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> Weren't you the one arguing that there's a reason people come off the bench?


I said there are REASONS. Another poster is the one who said that not being a starter means you aren't as good of a player as the person starting.

Depends on the team and their needs. Memphis has a lot of needs and Lowry still can't start.

I already gave the example of Ginobli. The Spurs, like the Blazers, have struggled to score with their second unit, so Manu went from starter to 6th man. A need was addressed. Or is it that Finley suddenly became a better player?


----------



## Ed O

R-Star said:


> Yea, except hes not. Outlaw has had a *FEW* big shots in the 4th. Its like talking with a gradeschooler. A few shots does not equal "Mr 4th quarter". A few clutch shots doesnt equal a primary scoring option. I fail to see what you're missing here.


Didn't you read his post? Once he states an opinion he cannot be reasoned with.

But that's MY fault, according to him. 

Ed O.


----------



## PapaG

Minstrel said:


> Whereas Outlaw is such a great player, as evidenced by the fact he can't start on varyingly bad teams.
> 
> Of course, Outlaw is blocked by a star, right? Hard to be better than a guy like Martell Webster.



Who is playing at the end of games?


----------



## Minstrel

PapaG said:


> Who is playing at the end of games?


Who's starting? Why doesn't Outlaw start AND finish games? Good players do both.


----------



## PapaG

Ed O said:


> Didn't you read his post? *Once he states an opinion he cannot be reasoned with.*
> But that's MY fault, according to him.
> 
> Ed O.


My opinion is that Outlaw is a better player than Lowry.

I won't budge on that opinion.


----------



## Minstrel

PapaG said:


> My opinion is that Outlaw is a better player than Lowry.
> 
> I won't budge on that opinion.


Nor will you support that opinion.


----------



## PapaG

Minstrel said:


> Who's starting? Why doesn't Outlaw start AND finish games? Good players do both.


Why doesn't Ginobli? Is he not a good player? How about Barbosa?

Jason Kidd started on the Olympic team. Is he better than Chris Paul?

Why haven't the Blazers extended Webster? If he's better than Outlaw, surely they would lock him up, right?


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> My opinion is that Outlaw is a better player than Lowry.
> 
> I won't budge on that opinion.


Why bother debating then?


----------



## PapaG

Minstrel said:


> Nor will you support that opinion.



What's to refute? The statistics are obvious.


----------



## HAAK72

PapaG said:


> Kyle Lowry for Travis Outlaw. :lol:


...yeah, no ****!!! That is a laugher for sure, I wonder how fast KP would start his laughter [I bet it would be, "You send us Travis Outlaw and we will send you Ky"..."AHAHAHA, stop right there because everyone knows we would ONLY be interesting in Conley Jr as Oden's sidekick!!!"]


----------



## PapaG

R-Star said:


> Why bother debating then?


Because I find it funny that the Outlaw hatred on this board is so extreme that people are actually trying to convince others that KYLE LOWRY is a better NBA player, right now, than Travis Outlaw.

Memphis thought so highly of Lowry that they used a lottery pick on a player who is also tiny and who also can't shoot. So let's trade Outlaw, a proven end of game scorer, for him straight up!!!


----------



## Minstrel

PapaG said:


> Why doesn't Ginobli? Is he not a good player? How about Barbosa?


Ginobili plays the third most minutes per game on the Spurs, behind only Duncan and Parker. Outlaw plays the sixth most minutes per game on Portland, and slightly fewer than Webster.

Barbosa plays behind a star. His name is Steve Nash. Are you suggesting that Webster is a Nash-like star, thus blocking a good player in Outlaw? 



> Jason Kidd started on the Olympic team. Is he better than Chris Paul?


No, that's standard veteran leadership fetish. Is Webster starting over Outlaw due to being more veteran than Outlaw?


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> Because I find it funny that the Outlaw hatred on this board is so extreme that people are actually trying to convince others that KYLE LOWRY is a better NBA player, right now, than Travis Outlaw.
> 
> Memphis thought so highly of Lowry that they used a lottery pick on a player who is also tiny and who also can't shoot. So let's trade Outlaw, a proven end of game scorer, for him straight up!!!


He also cant defend......... Oh wait, you've never seen him play.


----------



## PapaG

HAAK72 said:


> ...yeah, no ****!!! That is a laugher for sure, I wonder how fast KP would start his laughter [I bet it would be, "You send us Travis Outlaw and we will send you Ky"..."AHAHAHA, stop right there because everyone knows we would ONLY be interesting in Conly Jr as Oden's sidekick!!!"]


There are people in this thread who would do the Lowry deal. Thank goodness they aren't KP!


----------



## PapaG

Minstrel said:


> *Ginobili plays the third most minutes per game on the Spurs, behind only Duncan and Parker.* Outlaw plays the sixth most minutes per game on Portland, and slightly fewer than Webster.


Yet he still isn't starting. Notice how you changed your point and offered reasons for why Ginobli and Barbosa aren't starting, though.

I've offered reason for why Webster starts only to be shouted down. If Nate thought Webster was truly the better player, he would be the one taking big shots at the end of games. 

PERIOD


----------



## PapaG

R-Star said:


> He also cant defend......... Oh wait, you've never seen him play.


Worst defensive team in the NBA in terms of FG%...but they have Kyle Lowry shutting people down!


----------



## Minstrel

PapaG said:


> Yet he still isn't starting. Notice how you changed your point and offered reasons for why Ginobli and Barbosa aren't starting, though.


My statement was general, obviously. There are isolated exceptions to every rule. None of those exceptions explain Outlaw not starting if he is, in fact, a very good player.



> If Nate thought Webster was truly the better player, he would be the one taking big shots at the end of games.
> 
> PERIOD


No, McMillan would give more minutes to the player he thought was better. You see, there's this revolutionary idea sweeping coaching whereupon you give more minutes to your best players. Because it helps you win games.

He gives more minutes to Webster. Webster is pretty mediocre. That says pretty bad things about Outlaw.


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> Worst defensive team in the NBA in terms of FG%...but they have Kyle Lowry shutting people down!


So you've seen him play quite a bit then right?


----------



## B-Roy

Kyle Lowry
25.5 MPG, 82 games, 9 starts, 43.2% FG%, 3 RPG, 3.6 APG, 1.1 SPG, 9.6 PPG

Mike Conley
26.1 MPG, 56 games, 46 starts, 42.8% FG%, 2.6 RPG, 4.2 APG, .8 SPG, 9.4 PPG

They look pretty even to me. Lowry looks like he could be even better, especially with his defensive tenacity. Would you trade Outlaw for Conley? They even play about the same amount of minutes.


----------



## Minstrel

B-Roy said:


> Kyle Lowry
> 25.5 MPG, 82 games, 9 starts, 43.2% FG%, 3 RPG, 3.6 APG, 1.1 SPG, 9.6 PPG
> 
> Mike Conley
> 26.1 MPG, 56 games, 46 starts, 40.2$ FG%, 2.6 RPG, 4.2 APG, .9 SPG, 9.8 PPG
> 
> They look pretty even to me. Lowry looks like he could be even better, especially with his defensive tenacity. Would you trade Outlaw for Conley? They even play about the same amount of minutes.


If Portland needed a point guard, I'd definitely consider trading Outlaw for Lowry (I actually prefer Lowry to Conley Jr.). As it is, I think Portland needs small forwards more than guards, as I think Bayless, Roy and Fernandez are the future three guard rotation, and Blake is an okay stop-gap until Bayless and Fernandez are up to speed.


----------



## HAAK72

B-Roy said:


> Kyle Lowry
> 25.5 MPG, 82 games, 9 starts, 43.2% FG%, 3 RPG, 3.6 APG, 1.1 SPG, 9.6 PPG
> 
> Mike Conley
> 26.1 MPG, 56 games, 46 starts, 42.8% FG%, 2.6 RPG, 4.2 APG, .8 SPG, 9.4 PPG
> 
> They look pretty even to me. Lowry looks like he could be even better, especially with his defensive tenacity. Would you trade Outlaw for Conley? They even play about the same amount of minutes.


...the BIGGEST difference is that fact that one faced the other teams first unit while the other one played against the 2nd unit for the majority of their respective minutes [is it all relative, I doubt it]


----------



## PapaG

Minstrel said:


> My statement was general, obviously. There are isolated exceptions to every rule. *None of those exceptions explain Outlaw not starting if he is, in fact, a very good player.*


Where did I say he was a very good player? I said he plays at the end of games and is better than Kyle Lowry. One a fact, the other an opinion that most objective fans would agree with.




> No, McMillan would give more minutes to the player he thought was better. You see, there's this revolutionary idea sweeping coaching whereupon you give more minutes to your best players. Because it helps you win games.


Another revolutionary point is you put your best players on the floor at the end of close games. 



> He gives more minutes to Webster. Webster is pretty mediocre. That says pretty bad things about Outlaw.


That's fair. I don't agree with it, but it could be a possibility. Nate must be a real moron, then, to deliberately put the ball in the hands of a player worse than Martell Webster at the end of close games.


----------



## PapaG

HAAK72 said:


> ...the BIGGEST difference is that fact that one faced the other teams first unit while the other one played against the 2nd unit for the majority of their respective minutes [is it all relative, I doubt it]


Plus they both played on a horrendous team. Damon Stoudamire looked like a future All-Star when he played on a similarly horrendous team.

Also, the poster didn't put up Lowry's 25% 3 PT FG%, which is simply unacceptable for a PG in the Blazer offense.


----------



## B-Roy

HAAK72 said:


> ...the BIGGEST difference is that fact that one faced the other teams first unit while the other one played against the 2nd unit for the majority of their respective minutes [is it all relative, I doubt it]


Wouldn't the same apply for Outlaw?

To PapaG, Conley only shot 33% from 3, which is not much better. Also, with a player that young, it's easy for them to improve.

Another thing I'd like to add, Lowry got to the line 4.2 times per game, the most out of anyone on his team.


----------



## Minstrel

PapaG said:


> Another revolutionary point is you put your best players on the floor at the end of close games.


It's not either/or. You can both play a lot of minutes and be on the floor at the end.

There's no question Outlaw has his strengths. His main strength is that he has the size and talent to get his own shot. In late game, single-possession situations, you want to get into the game the players who have the best chance of getting a good a shot off. Outlaw fits that. I just don't think his overall game is terribly strong, and his minutes reflect that.


----------



## HAAK72

B-Roy said:


> Wouldn't the same apply for Outlaw?
> 
> To PapaG, Conley only shot 33% from 3, which is not much better. Also, with a player that young, it's easy for them to improve.


...your post didn't say anything about him, but I suppose that would be partially correct [I am just going to take a wild guess and assume that he will be facing the "best" at the end of the game...I don't think Lowry is closing out the final buzzer for The Grizz, is he???]


----------



## PapaG

R-Star said:


> So you've seen him play quite a bit then right?


No, I haven't, at least as a pro. Memphis is a horrible team that doesn't get national games, and Lowry is an afterthought on that horrible team. He got hurt early in his rookie year, which is also a concern for a guy who is so small. I did see him play more frequently at Villanova, where frankly Randy Foye looked the much better prospect. 

That said, Lowry's 70% FT shooting, 26% 3 PT FG%, and short stature are enough for me to laugh about this "deal". Who is he going to take minutes from? I don't think he'd see the floor for this team next year, or at least as a part of the season-opening rotation.


----------



## B-Roy

HAAK72 said:


> ...your post didn't say anything about him, but I suppose that would be partially correct [I am just going to take a wild guess and assume that he will be facing the "best" at the end of the game...I don't think Lowry is closing out the final buzzer for The Grizz, is he???]


That, I don't know. Maybe someone could check. If he is indeed playing in the 4th quarter, wouldn't that kill PapaG's argument?


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> Wouldn't the same apply for Outlaw?
> 
> To PapaG, Conley only shot 33% from 3, which is not much better. *Also, with a player that young, it's easy for them to improve.*
> Another thing I'd like to add, Lowry got to the line 4.2 times per game, the most out of anyone on his team.


I don't agree with that. In fact, I think that a player's strengths are pretty much always going to be their strenghts and their weakness a weakness. Sure, there can be slight improvements, but really it is up to the coach to put their players in positions that maximize their strengths while minimizing their weaknesses. 

I think back to the many Sergio discussions in which I was involved. A popular belief was that 'his shooting will get much better'. I disagree; sure, he can work on his shot, but it's not like he will ever be anything more than a below-average NBA shooter. I tend to think that the EA-ization (my new term) of sports leads to this thinking. In those games, you can 'train' players to make a weakness a strength. In the real world, it's up to the coach to get the best out of what the players offer.

As for Lowry getting to the line, I do like that fact as it shows he can get to the rim, but keep in mind he was playing without a big or bigs clogging the middle. That will not be the case in Portland. Also keep in mind that the bigger Jarryd Bayless is also penetrator who would be taking minutes from Lowry.


----------



## B-Roy

Well.....here's some good info. (All stats taken from 82games.com)

All of these stats are in the *4th quarter*

Outlaw played a total of 783 minutes in the, Lowry played 750. Very comparable.

Outlaw had a +/- of -13, whereas Lowry had a +/- of +7.

Outlaw scored 4.9 PPG in the 4th, Lowry scored 3.6. Outlaw was assisted on 64% of his shots, Lowry was assisted on only 32% of his shots.

Lowry also dished out 1.4 assists in the 4th, 13th in the league. 

It seems to me that Lowry was a very crucial player for the Grizzlies in the 4th quarter.

PapaG, no one is actually advocating that we trade Outlaw for Lowry, however, whether Outlaw is truly a better player than Lowry is very debatable.

One last thing: Lowry was 5th in the league in charges drawn, with 47.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> That, I don't know. Maybe someone could check. *If he is indeed playing in the 4th quarter, wouldn't that kill PapaG's argument*?


How? Memphis played very few close games after Gasol got traded; Outlaw was having plays called for him at the end of road games.

How would Lowry playing in the 4th quarter mean he is a better player than Outlaw?


----------



## drexlersdad

lowery is a good prospect, but im not sure how many minutes he would gather next year on the blazers.

outlaw played almost all of his minutes last year at the pf position. comparing him to martell is not really valid imo. and as far as his scoring goes, anyone who watched alot of blazers games can attest to his 4th quarter scoring. sometimes he was off, but he put up alot of shots early in the 4th on a regular occasion.

outlaw for lowery is close, but not really fair value imo. seeing lowery play reminds me of jarrett jack actually. takes the ball to the rim and gets to the line. i have to admit i never noticed him as a standout defender though, maybe he is, maybe he isnt. we dont need another jarrett jack, even if he is better than outlaw.


----------



## B-Roy

Clutch stats. 

4th quarter or overtime, less than 5 minutes left, neither team ahead by more than 5 points - 82games

All these stats are taken from 82games.

Outlaw played 141 minutes in the clutch, Lowry played 96. Part of that, like PapaG said, has to do with the fact that Memphis did not play that many close games.

The following are per 48 minutes of clutch time.

Outlaw scored 29.2 points, Lowry scored 20.4.

Outlaw was assisted on 60% of his shots, Lowry was assisted on only 9%. (One of the best in the league)

Outlaw however, shot 50%, whereas Lowry only shot 34%.

Outlaw would go to the FT line 10 times, Lowry would go 13 times, but Outlaw converted more of his FTs.

Outlaw dishes out 1 assist, and turns it over 1.7 times, Lowry dishes out 6.5, and turns it over 2.5 times.

Outlaw gets 1 steal, Lowry gets 2.

They're very comparable. It seems pretty ignorant to say that Outlaw is a better player than Lowry without at least considering the stats.


----------



## zagsfan20

I see no reason for the need to trade Outlaw for a PG. Denying Outlaw's abilities as a player because McMillan chose not to start him is pretty ridiculous as well. It has nothing to do with Outlaw. Its the same thing that has bugged me about McMillan since he's been coaching. He's always got his 'good ol' boys'. We saw it with Ridnour in Seattle, we saw it with Jarrett Jack and we've definitely seen it with Martell.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> Well.....here's some good info. (All stats taken from 82games.com)
> 
> All of these stats are in the *4th quarter*
> 
> Outlaw played a total of 783 minutes in the, Lowry played 750. Very comparable.
> 
> Outlaw had a +/- of -13, whereas Lowry had a +/- of +7.
> 
> Outlaw scored 4.9 PPG in the 4th, Lowry scored 3.6. Outlaw was assisted on 64% of his shots, Lowry was assisted on only 32% of his shots.
> 
> Lowry also dished out 1.4 assists in the 4th, 13th in the league.
> 
> It seems to me that Lowry was a very crucial player for the Grizzlies in the 4th quarter.
> 
> PapaG, no one is actually advocating that we trade Outlaw for Lowry, however, whether Outlaw is truly a better player than Lowry is very debatable.
> 
> One last thing: Lowry was 5th in the league in charges drawn, with 47.



Again, take a look at the margin of the games. On bad teams, the garbage players play the garbage minutes.

Let's take the month of February. In that month, Memphis played 12 games. They beat Sacto by 13 points; Kyle Lowry had 0 points in that effort. In the other 11 games, the closest game played was a 7 point loss to the Sonics; Lowry had 5 points. The second closest game Memphis played was an 11 point loss to Dallas; Lowry had 5 points. Next? A loss to New Orleans by 13; Lowry had 4 points. The other 8 games they lost by a minimum of 14 points. In those games, Lowry averaged 10.5 ppg and was in double figures 5 times.

On the other hand, all year long, Portland only lost 8 games by 14 or more points.

Outlaw was playing meaningful minutes in winnable games; Lowry and Memphis were playing for...what?


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> Again, take a look at the margin of the games. On bad teams, the garbage players play the garbage minutes.
> 
> Let's take the month of February. In that month, Memphis played 12 games. They beat Sacto by 13 points; Kyle Lowry had 0 points in that effort. In the other 11 games, the closest game played was a 7 point loss to the Sonics; Lowry had 5 points. The second closest game Memphis played was an 11 point loss to Dallas; Lowry had 5 points. Next? A loss to New Orleans by 13; Lowry had 4 points. The other 8 games they lost by a minimum of 14 points. In those games, Lowry averaged 10.5 ppg and was in double figures 5 times.
> 
> On the other hand, all year long, Portland only lost 8 games by 14 or more points.
> 
> Outlaw was playing meaningful minutes in winnable games; Lowry and Memphis were playing for...what?


I also posted clutch minutes, which were also very comparable.


----------



## drexlersdad

B-Roy said:


> Clutch stats.
> 
> 4th quarter or overtime, less than 5 minutes left, neither team ahead by more than 5 points - 82games
> 
> All these stats are taken from 82games.
> 
> Outlaw played 141 minutes in the clutch, Lowry played 96. Part of that, like PapaG said, has to do with the fact that Memphis did not play that many close games.
> 
> The following are per 48 minutes of clutch time.
> 
> Outlaw scored 29.2 points, Lowry scored 20.4.
> 
> Outlaw was assisted on 60% of his shots, Lowry was assisted on only 9%. (One of the best in the league)
> 
> Outlaw however, shot 50%, whereas Lowry only shot 34%.
> 
> Outlaw would go to the FT line 10 times, Lowry would go 13 times, but Outlaw converted more of his FTs.
> 
> Outlaw dishes out 1 assist, and turns it over 1.7 times, Lowry dishes out 6.5, and turns it over 2.5 times.
> 
> Outlaw gets 1 steal, Lowry gets 2.
> 
> They're very comparable. It seems pretty ignorant to say that Outlaw is a better player than Lowry without at least considering the stats.


you say being assisted on a small number of your shots is a good thing? one of the best in the league? would that not mean he is a 1 on 1 player? at the pg position? i guess i am unfamiliar with that statistic and its importance.

as far as clutch situations go, i think outlaw wins the comparison hands down. more scoring, much, much, much better shooting percentages.

although comparing them statistically is a complete crap shoot, as they play completely different positions with completely different responsibilities.


----------



## Minstrel

drexlersdad said:


> you say being assisted on a small number of your shots is a good thing? one of the best in the league? would that not mean he is a 1 on 1 player? at the pg position? i guess i am unfamiliar with that statistic and its importance.


It means that you are creating your own shot, rather than being set up by other people. The "What has Kenyon Martin done away from Jason Kidd?" issue.

It has little to do with being selfish. That would be how much you help other players score. The fewer of your points that were assisted by others, the less your value is bound up in the quality of your teammates.


----------



## B-Roy

> you say being assisted on a small number of your shots is a good thing? one of the best in the league? would that not mean he is a 1 on 1 player? at the pg position? i guess i am unfamiliar with that statistic and its importance.


One of Outlaw's strenghts, was that he was supposedly able to go 1 on 1 and score at will in the 4th. Being assisted less means you're able to create more of your own shots. That's not always good however, since Lowry was only able to score on 34% of his shots, whereas Outlaw scored on 50% of his, probably due to being assisted on his shots.


> as far as clutch situations go, i think outlaw wins the comparison hands down. more scoring, much, much, much better shooting percentages.


Assists are also an important stat. If you can get the ball to a teammate in the clutch, and then *he scores*, you're also helping the team a lot.


> although comparing them statistically is a complete crap shoot, as they play completely different positions with completely different responsibilities.


Very true to an extent. But I wouldn't be so confident as to say Outlaw is better than Lowry hands down. Seems like such an ignorant thing to say.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> Clutch stats.
> 
> 4th quarter or overtime, less than 5 minutes left, neither team ahead by more than 5 points - 82games
> 
> All these stats are taken from 82games.
> 
> Outlaw played 141 minutes in the clutch, Lowry played 96. Part of that, like PapaG said, has to do with the fact that Memphis did not play that many close games.
> 
> The following are per 48 minutes of clutch time.
> 
> Outlaw scored 29.2 points, Lowry scored 20.4.
> 
> Outlaw was assisted on 60% of his shots, Lowry was assisted on only 9%. (One of the best in the league)
> 
> Outlaw however, shot 50%, whereas Lowry only shot 34%.
> 
> Outlaw would go to the FT line 10 times, Lowry would go 13 times, but Outlaw converted more of his FTs.
> 
> Outlaw dishes out 1 assist, and turns it over 1.7 times, Lowry dishes out 6.5, and turns it over 2.5 times.
> 
> Outlaw gets 1 steal, Lowry gets 2.
> 
> They're very comparable. *It seems pretty ignorant to say that Outlaw is a better player than Lowry without at least considering the stats*.


And the stats are in Outlaw's favor, as is the fact his team won more close games with Outlaw playing a key role. Actually, if you look at Memphis' schedule, they won only 5 games by 5 points or less while losing 16 (1 of which was by 8 in OT).]

Portland, on the other hand, won 16 games by 5 or less while losing only 6 by the same margin (1 in OT by more than 5 included).

So that is 5-16 in close games for Memphis and 16-5 for Portland. Flip those two statistics and Memphis wins 33 games while Portland only 30 games.

As I was saying...


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> And the stats are in Outlaw's favor, as is the fact his team won more close games with Outlaw playing a key role. Actually, if you look at Memphis' schedule, they won only 5 games by 5 points or less while losing 16 (1 of which was by 8 in OT).]
> 
> Portland, on the other hand, won 16 games by 5 or less while losing only 6 by the same margin (1 in OT by more than 5 included).
> 
> So that is 5-16 in close games for Memphis and 16-5 for Portland. Flip those two statistics and Memphis wins 33 games while Portland only 30 games.
> 
> As I was saying...


So you're crediting all of Portland's clutch wins to Outlaw?


----------



## PapaG

Minstrel said:


> It means that you are creating your own shot, rather than being set up by other people. The "What has Kenyon Martin done away from Jason Kidd?" issue.
> 
> It has little to do with being selfish. That would be how much you help other players score. The fewer of your points that were assisted by others, the less your value is bound up in the quality of your teammates.



Comparing points by assist ratios between an off-the-ball player and a PG is inherently unfair.

The true stat is who was on the winning team more often, and as I pointed out earlier Outlaw and the Blazers were VERY good in close games.


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> Comparing points by assist ratios between an off-the-ball player and a PG is inherently unfair.
> 
> The true stat is who was on the winning team more often, and as I pointed out earlier Outlaw and the Blazers were VERY good in close games.


No it's not. PG's are supposed to assist more, and a SF like Outlaw is supposed to score more. Outlaw did score more, and Lowry did dish out more assists. 

They're comparable. Outlaw isn't a god.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> So you're crediting all of Portland's clutch wins to Outlaw?



Of course not, but if he is scoring more than Lowry, and shooting better than Lowry, and winning more than Lowry, both in terms of an entire game and in the clutch, I'm trying to understand how Lowry is better? 

Or am I still being "ignorant"?


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> Of course not, but if he is scoring more than Lowry, and shooting better than Lowry, and winning more than Lowry, both in terms of an entire game and in the clutch, I'm trying to understand how Lowry is better?
> 
> Or am I still being "ignorant"?


Yes. Portland is a better team than Memphis, of course they're going to have more wins and close games. Fact is, Lowry played pretty well in the meaningful minutes he was given.

And last I checked, the 4th quarter is only 1/4 of the whole game. It doesn't determine who's a better player. I only brought up these stats because you insist that Outlaw is some sort of 4th quarter god, when Lowry is pretty good in his own right.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> No it's not. PG's are supposed to assist more, and a SF like Outlaw is supposed to score more. Outlaw did score more, and Lowry did dish out more assists.
> 
> They're comparable. *Outlaw isn't a god*.



Who said he was a "god"? Totally ridiculous.

You pointed out that Lowry's 9% assisted basket ratio was "very good". He's a PG who drives. He's either getting to the rim or passing. I'd point out that Outlaw's prorated 29 ppg with 50% shooting is "very good" as well. 

Oh, and by the looks of it, Lowry's team is losing close games. Bunches of them.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> Yes. Portland is a better team than Memphis, of course they're going to have more wins and close games. Fact is, Lowry played pretty well in the meaningful minutes he was given.
> 
> And last I checked, the 4th quarter is only 1/4 of the whole game. It doesn't determine who's a better player. *I only brought up these stats because you insist that Outlaw is some sort of 4th quarter god*, when Lowry is pretty good in his own right.


I never said that. What has happened here is that by every available statistic Outlaw looks better by comparision.

He shoots better, he scores more, and most importantly, he is helping his team win more at the end of close games. So now you lash out at me.

Predictable.


----------



## zagsfan20

B-Roy said:


> No it's not. PG's are supposed to assist more, and a SF like Outlaw is supposed to score more. Outlaw did score more, and Lowry did dish out more assists.
> 
> They're comparable. Outlaw isn't a god.


What is with you and claiming that everybody is inferring that people are a god. Because someone is making an argument for a player doesn't mean that the person thinks that player is a "god", like you imply.


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> Who said he was a "god"? Totally ridiculous.
> 
> You pointed out that Lowry's 9% assisted basket ratio was "very good". He's a PG who drives. He's either getting to the rim or passing. I'd point out that Outlaw's prorated 29 ppg with 50% shooting is "very good" as well.
> 
> Oh, and by the looks of it, Lowry's team is losing close games. Bunches of them.


Memphis is a bad team, of course they're going to lose more games. It isn't Lowry's fault though, as he contributed *positively* in the games they've played. You're trying to punish Lowry when part of it was his team.

I also never denied that Outlaw's stats were impressive, I mainly said that Lowry's was impressive in his own right. They're comparable.

I didn't start this debate to try and convince you that Lowry was better than Outlaw. I never advocated for this deal, and I sure as hell wouldn't do it, since we have a log jam at point. I was merely trying to make you at least consider the (ridiculous, in your case) notion that Lowry might be a better player than Outlaw. It seems to me that nothing that I, or anyone else says, will be able to break through that thick skull of yours.

Whatever, I'm done. Do what you will. Just know that it's completely true that *many* Blazer fans overvalue their players. Maybe it's because we're spoiled. Doesn't matter, time will tell.


----------



## B-Roy

zagsfan20 said:


> What is with you and claiming that everybody is inferring that people are a god. Because someone is making an argument for a player doesn't mean that the person thinks that player is a "god", like you imply.


I'm exaggerating, of course. It's because he says it over and over.


----------



## Tortimer

I can't believe there are this many people that would want to trade Outlaw for Lowry except for Memphis fans. I'm even a Lowry fan and wouldn't trade Outlaw for Lowry on the Blazers. I'm not saying it isn't a almost equal trade but IMO we need Outlaw a lot more then Lowry. I would guess there is no way KP would trade Outlaw for Lowry with the roster we currently have.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> *Memphis is a bad team, of course they're going to lose more games*.



I admit I am surprised to see that Portland and Memphis played in the exact same amount of games decided 5 points or less. To me, Portland's incredible record in these games and Memphis' horrible record in the same type of game says a lot about the key players on the court at the time.


----------



## talman

Caaannnnn you feeeeelll the looovvvee toniiiight!!??!


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> I'm exaggerating, of course. It's because he says it over and over.


Wrong, I've never said anything close to it.


----------



## Fork

Tortimer said:


> I can't believe there are this many people that would want to trade Outlaw for Lowry except for Memphis fans. I'm even a Lowry fan and wouldn't trade Outlaw for Lowry on the Blazers. I'm not saying it isn't a almost equal trade but IMO we need Outlaw a lot more then Lowry. I would guess there is no way KP would trade Outlaw for Lowry with the roster we currently have.


I don't get why we need him so badly?

Martell Webster is our starting small forward. Rudy Fernandez looks like he's able to play some 3 (and he'll have to if he wants playing time. Roy can play some 3 depending on match-ups. Batum may see some spot minutes during the season. We have enough small forwards already.

If it's bench scoring you like, which seems like it's bout the only thing Outlaw does very well, we have Fernandez and Bayless this season. Those guys can easily fill the scoring void that would be created if we lost outlaw. And probably more efficiently than Outlaw. 

I'm not sure what it is about Outlaw tells you we have to keep him.


----------



## drexlersdad

B-Roy said:


> One of Outlaw's strenghts, was that he was supposedly able to go 1 on 1 and score at will in the 4th. Being assisted less means you're able to create more of your own shots. That's not always good however, since Lowry was only able to score on 34% of his shots, whereas Outlaw scored on 50% of his, probably due to being assisted on his shots.


everyone knows outlaws best attribute is creating his own shot. if lowry can only manage 34% shooting going one on one, maybe he shouldnt even bother.



> Assists are also an important stat. If you can get the ball to a teammate in the clutch, and then *he scores*, you're also helping the team a lot.


assists are a VERY important stat. for a pg. to a pf..... not so much. in that case, lowry racking up the amazing amount of 6 whole assists per 48 minutes in the clutch is sooooo amazing.



> Very true to an extent. But I wouldn't be so confident as to say Outlaw is better than Lowry hands down. Seems like such an ignorant thing to say.


 well something could seem to be anything to anyone. im not really too worried about that. I have seen both play, and IN MY OPINION, although they are very comparable as overall value goes, outlaw gets the edge.

*outlaw, as your stats reflect, is much better player in the clutch. do you disagree with the stats that you yourself posted?*

making an informed decision is not ignorant, the exact opposite in fact. claiming it to be, is at best pathetic. when you have nothing better to say, and your own facts refute your arguments, i guess you can always resort to name calling.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> Memphis is a bad team, of course they're going to lose more games. It isn't Lowry's fault though, as he contributed *positively* in the games they've played. You're trying to punish Lowry when part of it was his team.
> 
> I also never denied that Outlaw's stats were impressive, I mainly said that Lowry's was impressive in his own right. They're comparable.
> 
> I didn't start this debate to try and convince you that Lowry was better than Outlaw. I never advocated for this deal, and I sure as hell wouldn't do it, since we have a log jam at point. I was merely trying to make you at least consider the (ridiculous, in your case) notion that Lowry might be a better player than Outlaw. It seems to me that nothing that I, or anyone else says, will be able to break through that thick skull of yours.
> 
> Whatever, I'm done. Do what you will. *Just know that it's completely true that many Blazer fans overvalue their players.* Maybe it's because we're spoiled. Doesn't matter, time will tell.


I don't see how me not jumping on a Travis Outlaw for Kyle Lowry deal is me "overvaluing" Outlaw.

At. 

All.


----------



## zagsfan20

I don't know what it is about Martell that we have to keep him.


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> I don't see how me not jumping on a Travis Outlaw for Kyle Lowry deal is me "overvaluing" Outlaw.
> 
> At.
> 
> All.


You're right, it's not.

But not even considering the notion that Lowry may be better than Outlaw, is.


----------



## Ed O

Tortimer said:


> I can't believe there are this many people that would want to trade Outlaw for Lowry except for Memphis fans. I'm even a Lowry fan and wouldn't trade Outlaw for Lowry on the Blazers. I'm not saying it isn't a almost equal trade but IMO we need Outlaw a lot more then Lowry. I would guess there is no way KP would trade Outlaw for Lowry with the roster we currently have.


Has one person say they would want to trade Outlaw for Lowry in this thread?

I ask honestly, because it's conceivable that I missed someone... but I know that I didn't say I'd make the deal.

What I did say is that such a trade would not be an embarrassment. I did say that Lowry is arguably a better player than Outlaw.

In the eyes of anyone other than a massive Outlaw fan and/or a huge Blazers homer, I can't see how my statements are that outrageous. If stats had been presented that displayed I was entirely wrong, I might have reevaluated my position, but B-Roy has actually provided stats for the gut-level opinion I had on each of the players coming into this thread: they're about the same level of player.

Ed O.


----------



## B-Roy

drexlersdad said:


> well something could seem to be anything to anyone. im not really too worried about that. I have seen both play, and IN MY OPINION, although they are very comparable as overall value goes, outlaw gets the edge.
> 
> *outlaw, as your stats reflect, is much better player in the clutch. do you disagree with the stats that you yourself posted?*
> 
> making an informed decision is not ignorant, the exact opposite in fact. claiming it to be, is at best pathetic. when you have nothing better to say, and your own facts refute your arguments, i guess you can always resort to name calling.


Really? It seems to me that Outlaw, did what he was supposed to do, which was score at a high rate. It is also apparent to me that Lowry did what he was supposed to do, which is set up scoring options for teammates. 6.5 is good enough to be top 30 in the league, and in comparison, Brandon Roy had 6.8.


----------



## PapaG

zagsfan20 said:


> I don't know what it is about Martell that we have to keep him.


If he ever consistently hits his shot he is the perfect starting SF for this team. He has some length and is most comfortable camping out on the perimeter. Doubles to Oden or LMA should mean many open looks for him; if he can't do it this season I doubt he's a Blazer next year.


----------



## RoyToy

I haven't read any of this thread, but I'll just say Outlaw is/will be one of the best bench players in the NBA. He's the perfect type of player to come off the bench and I wouldn't be surprised if he won 6th Man of the Year Award this year.

Keep Outlaw.


----------



## PapaG

Ed O said:


> Has one person say they would want to trade Outlaw for Lowry in this thread?
> 
> I ask honestly, because it's conceivable that I missed someone... but I know that I didn't say I'd make the deal.
> 
> What I did say is that such a trade would not be an embarrassment. I did say that Lowry is arguably a better player than Outlaw.
> 
> In the eyes of anyone other than a massive Outlaw fan and/or a huge Blazers homer, I can't see how my statements are that outrageous. If stats had been presented that displayed I was entirely wrong, I might have reevaluated my position, but B-Roy has actually provided stats for the gut-level opinion I had on each of the players coming into this thread: *they're about the same level of player.*
> 
> Ed O.


I don't know which stats you are looking at because Outlaw scores more, shoots MUCH better, and his team wins more when the game is close. It is obvious that Lowry's 34% shooting in these situations has an impact on his team winning or losing.

Lowry wouldn't even see the court for the Blazers at the end of a close game unless a Blake, Bayless, Roy or Fernandez were injured.


----------



## Tortimer

Fork said:


> I don't get why we need him so badly?
> 
> Martell Webster is our starting small forward. Rudy Fernandez looks like he's able to play some 3 (and he'll have to if he wants playing time. Roy can play some 3 depending on match-ups. Batum may see some spot minutes during the season. We have enough small forwards already.
> 
> If it's bench scoring you like, which seems like it's bout the only thing Outlaw does very well, we have Fernandez and Bayless this season. Those guys can easily fill the scoring void that would be created if we lost outlaw. And probably more efficiently than Outlaw.
> 
> I'm not sure what it is about Outlaw tells you we have to keep him.


I'm not 100% sure Webster will be our starting SF for the championship run I hope we will be making in the next couple years. He might but I'm not sold on Webster but I hope your right.

I do think we should play Roy/Rudy and Bayless together against some teams depending on their SF.

I do think Bayless and/or Rudy will help our bench scoring but I still like having Outlaw playing when we need to have players that can create their own shot at the end of games. I do think Rudy and Bayless can also create their own shots along with Roy and Outlaw.

I'm not saying we can't afford to trade Outlaw but why would we trade him for another PG like Lowry. I like Lowry but IMO he isn't going to be any better then playing a Roy/Rudy/Bayless 3 guard rotation. I think if both Rudy and Bayless play as well as I think they will that this 3 guard rotation would work out great at the end of the season or at least next year.


----------



## Reep

PapaG said:


> If he ever consistently hits his shot he is the perfect starting SF for this team. He has some length and is most comfortable camping out on the perimeter. Doubles to Oden or LMA should mean many open looks for him; if he can't do it this season I doubt he's a Blazer next year.


I've always liked Martell because of his potential. However, reality is starting to set in for me. He would be the perfect SF for this team if:

- he would get more consistant in his shot
- he would develop any kind of handle (Travis has a better handle)
- he would learn to move without the ball
- he would become more than an sub-par - average defender
- he would develop good court vision to feed his teammates
- he would stop brooding when he isn't playing great

I hope he comes in a shows off a great handle and the ability to use his God-given athleticism to drive to the hole, and move without the ball. He showed he can do it when asked (when Roy was out), but he just sits most of the rest of the time. Come on Martell . . . bring it this year. 

If he doesn't show it in the next few weeks, he may be on the outside of the rotation looking in.


----------



## Ed O

zagsfan20 said:


> I don't know what it is about Martell that we have to keep him.


Why is this question relevant?

No one is saying that trading Webster for Lowry would be an embarrassment for Pritchard.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O

PapaG said:


> I don't know which stats you are looking at because Outlaw scores more, shoots MUCH better, and his team wins more when the game is close. It is obvious that Lowry's 34% shooting in these situations has an impact on his team winning or losing.


You're a trip, man. Sometimes that's a good thing... here? I'm not so sure.

Ed O.


----------



## drexlersdad

outlaw is nothing special, basically a one dimensional scoring forward. he is coveted around the league for just that reason.

lowry is a "pure" pg, who cant play off the ball. he defends well, and is average at best at everything else. he is coveted around the league for his heady play, nice defense, and ability to take the ball to the rim and finish.

we dont need a ballhandler at the pg position. we need someone who can keep defenses honest and not have their defenders sag off onto roy/oden/lma/outlaw. but that is irrelevant in this argument.

the fact that we are even wasting our time debating who is better implies to me that they are very close in overall value. although i would think memphis got the better end of the deal, as would pretty much 90% of the people who know basketball, in kp i trust. if he brings lowry in, he would be one of my favorite players.


----------



## zagsfan20

Ed O said:


> Why is this question relevant?
> 
> No one is saying that trading Webster for Lowry would be an embarrassment for Pritchard.
> 
> Ed O.


If the decision is between getting rid one of our SF's for a PG. It should be Martell who we should be using as trade bait.


----------



## PapaG

Ed O said:


> You're a trip, man. Sometimes that's a good thing... here? I'm not so sure.
> 
> Ed O.



The late game stats posted by B-Roy show that Outlaw scores more and shoots better when the game matters.

Pritchard would be a laughingstock if he traded Outlaw for Lowry straight-up. A 6' PG who shoots 26% from 3 PT range and 70% from the FT line and who would never see the court in Portland. This thought makes me a "trip".


----------



## Reep

drexlersdad said:


> the fact that we are even wasting our time debating who is better implies to me that they are very close in overall value.


*2

I think Outlaw is a better player, but Lowry gets credit for playing a position that is more difficult to fill. 

The main reason I like keeping Outlaw is his ability to get a shot off and hit it. However, I think that next year that need will be more likely filled by (after Roy) Rudy, Oden, Aldridge, and maybe Bayless.

I would probably lean toward keeping Outlaw just because players like him and we have a lot of solid PG prospects. I don't see Lowry as a big enough upgrade to make a change over. But, if KP does, then he should do it.


----------



## PapaG

zagsfan20 said:


> If the decision is between getting rid one of our SF's for a PG. It should be Martell who we should be using as trade bait.


From a contract perspective it makes even more sense since Webster is expiring. Then again, I wouldn't trade a player on the roster outside of Sergio or LaFrenz for Kyle Lowry at this point. Plus you see glimpses of Martell and see how perfectly he would fit in with the starters if he can ever be consistent.


----------



## elcap15

Bo Outlaw is still playing ?!


----------



## R-Star

Ed O said:


> Has one person say they would want to trade Outlaw for Lowry in this thread?
> 
> I ask honestly, because it's conceivable that I missed someone... but I know that I didn't say I'd make the deal.
> 
> What I did say is that such a trade would not be an embarrassment. I did say that Lowry is arguably a better player than Outlaw.
> 
> In the eyes of anyone other than a massive Outlaw fan and/or a huge Blazers homer, I can't see how my statements are that outrageous. If stats had been presented that displayed I was entirely wrong, I might have reevaluated my position, but B-Roy has actually provided stats for the gut-level opinion I had on each of the players coming into this thread: they're about the same level of player.
> 
> Ed O.



If this was posted on the NBA main board, the notion of Outlaw being a "Go to scorer" or whatever it was PapaG called him, he'd be run off as the Blazers homer he is.


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> I don't know which stats you are looking at because Outlaw scores more, shoots MUCH better, and his team wins more when the game is close. It is obvious that Lowry's 34% shooting in these situations has an impact on his team winning or losing.
> 
> Lowry wouldn't even see the court for the Blazers at the end of a close game unless a Blake, Bayless, Roy or Fernandez were injured.


Funny, because I havent seen Bayless or Fernandez play an NBA game........


----------



## It's_GO_Time

R-Star said:


> Funny, because I havent seen Bayless or Fernandez play an NBA game........


I don't think you have watched much of Outlaw either. You started the thread mocking PapaG saying a couple big shots in the 4th quarter doesn't make you a primary scorer. You were quickly corrected with video links showing it's been more than a couple of games. 

You probably don't follow the local press here either and read about how Outlaw was sought after this summer and that management and Nate have discussed how much they value Outlaw . . . Nate even compared Outlaw's value to Roy (slightly behind) this offseason.


This trade will never happen and there is a simple reason


Edit: I have solved the mystery. PapaG=Nate

PapaG: Traivis is a primary scorer
Nate: "I think he can be just as good as some of these top scorers. I think he can be a Tracy McGrady. I think he can be a Kobe (Bryant) in the sense of their ability to score over the defense," McMillan admitted. 

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=8167


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic

This deal won't go down. This thread reminds me of all the great what if threads from the pre-draft era!


----------



## Sonny-Canzano

Prtichard must really hate Outlaw if he makes him move to the city of Memphis.


----------



## TLo

I wouldn't say that trading Outlaw for Lowery would be an embarrasment. However, it *would *be stupid.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

TLo said:


> I wouldn't say that trading Outlaw for Lowery would be an embarrasment. However, it *would *be stupid.


Which of course begs the question:

Is it embarrassing to pull off a stupid trade? : )


----------



## PapaG

It's_GO_Time said:


> Edit: I have solved the mystery. PapaG=Nate
> 
> PapaG: Travis is a primary scorer
> Nate: "I think he can be just as good as some of these top scorers. I think he can be a Tracy McGrady. I think he can be a Kobe (Bryant) in the sense of their ability to score over the defense," McMillan admitted.
> 
> http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=8167


I won't go near as far as Nate did, although it is obvious that Travis IS a primary scorer at the end of games and for the second unit.


----------



## PapaG

R-Star said:


> If this was posted on the NBA main board, the notion of Outlaw being a "Go to scorer" or whatever it was PapaG called him, he'd be run off as the Blazers homer he is.


FACT - Travis is used as a go to scorer at the end of close games. There is no debating this point as I have offered both video proof and an interview of Outlaw in which he says Nate ran the final play of a game for him. I'm not saying he is Kobe Bryant, but in the context of this thread, Travis is the very definition of a primary scorer at the end of games.

I'm not sure what your problem is with me, but it would be nice if you offered some data of your own instead of just riding Ed O's considerable coat tails. I mean, if you're going to follow me around, at least have some facts to offer.

And again, trading Outlaw for Kyle Lowry would be an embarrassment. Pritchard may as well just give Outlaw away.


----------



## R-Star

PapaG said:


> FACT - Travis is used as a go to scorer at the end of close games. There is no debating this point as I have offered both video proof and an interview of Outlaw in which he says Nate ran the final play of a game for him. I'm not saying he is Kobe Bryant, but in the context of this thread, Travis is the very definition of a primary scorer at the end of games.
> 
> I'm not sure what your problem is with me, but it would be nice if you offered some data of your own instead of just riding Ed O's considerable coat tails. I mean, if you're going to follow me around, at least have some facts to offer.
> 
> And again, trading Outlaw for Kyle Lowry would be an embarrassment. Pritchard may as well just give Outlaw away.


A) Might as well trade Outlaw for nothing? This shows you know little to nothing on Lowry.

B) He gets 4.9 points a game in the 4th. How does that equate primary scorer? Reliable scoring option used in the 4th? Agreed. Primary scorer? No. Not with 4.9 points, no.
http://www.82games.com/QTR4S11.HTM

C) Hard to be accused of following you around, seeing as this is the only thread I've ever known to post with you.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

PapaG said:


> I won't go near as far as Nate did, although it is obvious that Travis IS a primary scorer at the end of games and for the second unit.


So you are saying you are not Nate . . . that's a bit disappointing. :biggrin:


----------



## PapaG

It's_GO_Time said:


> So you are saying you are not Nate . . . that's a bit disappointing. :biggrin:



If I was Nate, Pyrz would have been on the floor late in some of the games where the Blazers couldn't get a stop.


----------



## PapaG

R-Star said:


> A) Might as well trade Outlaw for nothing? This shows you know little to nothing on Lowry.


What I know about Lowry looks very, very bad. He would not see the floor, so why pick up another tiny PG?



> B) He gets 4.9 points a game in the 4th. How does that equate primary scorer? Reliable scoring option used in the 4th? Agreed. Primary scorer? No. Not with 4.9 points, no.
> http://www.82games.com/QTR4S11.HTM


4.9 ppg puts Outlaw exactly 0.2 ppg behind Brandon Roy's 5.1 ppg in the 4th. 4.9 ppg puts Outlaw in a tie for 31st in the league in 4th quarter scoring with Gerald Wallace, Richard Jefferson, Kevin Durant, Carmelo Anthony, Caron Butler, Mo Williams, Jason Terry, and Louis Williams. 

Of these players, Outlaw is second in FG% and 2nd in 3 PT %.

Plus, as I've offered at length, Nate runs plays specifically for Travis on the most important plays of the game. He is a primary scoring option by definition. Heck, Travis shoots better in both 2 pt FG% and ten points higher than Roy in 3 PT FG %. Perhaps Nate should run even more plays for Travis?



> C) Hard to be accused of following you around, seeing as this is the only thread I've ever known to post with you.


Thanks for finally addressing the topic instead of the poster.


----------



## NateBishop3

Yikes, reading through those 10 pages just to get to the end was maddening. 

A couple things:

1) I have seen almost zero of Lowry, so I will not comment on him specifically.

2) I do not think a trade at this juncture is a good idea. I'm too curious to see what Bayless, Rudy, Oden, and Diogu can do next season. 

3) I feel that we WILL have to move some of our young talent at some point. Travis is one of the leading cadidates to be traded.

There's one thing that was screaming out to me while I was reading through this debacle of a thread. One thing that never seemed to be fully addressed, but should have been hit on early and often. 

Value in the NBA is in the eye of the beholder. 



PapaG said:


> If Blazer fans are "overvaluing" Outlaw, this writer is (A) undervaluing Outlaw and, (B) obviously a bit confused on how the CBA works in terms of trades and how that applies to a Conley deal.
> 
> As for the "overvaluing" theory proposed earlier, how is it that one of the best scorers off the bench in the entire league, a guy who also makes only $4m per, is "overvalued"? My worry with Outlaw being traded is that because of his low contract value, it is almost impossible to get similar production in return short of altering the roster by adding more players to a deal. At his contract value, it seems as if it is pretty much impossible to "overvalue" him.


You are assuming that overvalue in the NBA is based on a salary-to-scoring ratio. It's not. Sure, some teams will look at a decent scorer with a bargain contract as a good value, but that's hardly the only determining factor. 

In this case people are saying that Blazer fans overvalue Outlaw in the greater sense of value, meaning we think he's worth more in trade than Kyle Lowry. 

Next point, you keep saying that Outlaw shoots a better percentage and scores more points in the 4th, therefor he MUST be a better player than Lowry and he MUST have more value. This statement is true and false. He has more value to YOU. He might not have more value to the Blazers, and this is the whole point behind my post. 

Do the Blazers need Travis Outlaw now that they have Bayless and Rudy to score for the second unit? If your whole reasoning behind Travis' value is that he is a clutch shooter and a solid scorer for the bench, what happens when the team no longer needs that? He loses value in the eyes of the Blazers. 

Let's say, hypothetically, that the Blazers need a backup point guard who can play solid defense and distribute the ball. 

We can also say, hypothetically, that the Grizzlies need another scorer to come off their bench and make buckets when the team needs them.

The Blazers, hypothetically, would value Kyle Lowry MORE than Travis Outlaw simply because he possesses talents that the Blazers NEED. 

The Grizzlies would value Travis Outlaw MORE than Kyle Lowry simply because he possesses talents that they NEED. 

Value in the NBA is based on team needs. If a team needs a shooter, but has a lot of slashers, they would value a shooter over a slasher. The Blazers have a lot of scorers, but not a lot of defenders, therefor they would value a defender over a scorer. Period. If it takes trading one of our scorers to obtain a defender, they will make the trade.


----------



## e_blazer1

Man, things must really be slow around here for some off the wall rumor by a beat writer in Memphis to blossom into this Godzilla thread. I don't know diddly about Lowry, but I know that if Pritchard were to make a deal for him, it would only be because he was convinced that he had undeveloped talent that would help the Blazers more than Travis would. I doubt seriously that there's anything to this rumor, but if it should happen to go down, I'm more than happy to trust KP's instincts. He's been batting a pretty high percentage.

That said, I like Travis and I think his game may blossom even more. He needs to improve his ball handling to play the SF spot on a consistent basis and he needs to work on his defense, but he's certainly got enough offensive game to be worth continuing to give him PT.


----------



## c_note

Ed O said:


> *In my opinion,*People on this board tend to vastly overrate Outlaw, who's not even a starter in the NBA yet. With that being said, even assuming the rumor has validity, we all know that Pritch is a constant communicator, and mere conversation doesn't mean anything would come of it.
> 
> Ed O.


Fixed that for ya.


----------



## PapaG

NateBishop3 said:


> Yikes, reading through those 10 pages just to get to the end was maddening.
> 
> A couple things:
> 
> 1) I have seen almost zero of Lowry, so I will not comment on him specifically.
> 
> 2) I do not think a trade at this juncture is a good idea. I'm too curious to see what Bayless, Rudy, Oden, and Diogu can do next season.
> 
> 3) I feel that we WILL have to move some of our young talent at some point. Travis is one of the leading cadidates to be traded.
> 
> There's one thing that was screaming out to me while I was reading through this debacle of a thread. One thing that never seemed to be fully addressed, but should have been hit on early and often.
> 
> Value in the NBA is in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> 
> 
> You are assuming that overvalue in the NBA is based on a salary-to-scoring ratio. It's not. Sure, some teams will look at a decent scorer with a bargain contract as a good value, but that's hardly the only determining factor.
> 
> In this case people are saying that Blazer fans overvalue Outlaw in the greater sense of value, meaning we think he's worth more in trade than Kyle Lowry.
> 
> Next point, you keep saying that Outlaw shoots a better percentage and scores more points in the 4th, therefor he MUST be a better player than Lowry and he MUST have more value. This statement is true and false. He has more value to YOU. He might not have more value to the Blazers, and this is the whole point behind my post.
> 
> Do the Blazers need Travis Outlaw now that they have Bayless and Rudy to score for the second unit? If your whole reasoning behind Travis' value is that he is a clutch shooter and a solid scorer for the bench, what happens when the team no longer needs that? He loses value in the eyes of the Blazers.
> 
> Let's say, hypothetically, that the Blazers need a backup point guard who can play solid defense and distribute the ball.
> 
> We can also say, hypothetically, that the Grizzlies need another scorer to come off their bench and make buckets when the team needs them.
> 
> The Blazers, hypothetically, would value Kyle Lowry MORE than Travis Outlaw simply because he possesses talents that the Blazers NEED.
> 
> The Grizzlies would value Travis Outlaw MORE than Kyle Lowry simply because he possesses talents that they NEED.
> 
> Value in the NBA is based on team needs. If a team needs a shooter, but has a lot of slashers, they would value a shooter over a slasher. The Blazers have a lot of scorers, but not a lot of defenders, therefor they would value a defender over a scorer. Period. If it takes trading one of our scorers to obtain a defender, they will make the trade.



What talents does Lowry have that the Blazers need? Horrible 3 Pt shooting? Below average size?

He is simply not needed on this team. Is Outlaw needed? I'm not sure, but getting a non-factor like Kyle Lowry in exchange would be awful. There would have to be better deals available for Outlaw, and since Outlaw clearly does have value to the team, why trade him for someone who would likely be the 3rd string PG at best?

So, when this trade doesn't go down, I'll be sure to bump it back to the top of the forum.

As for value to the Blazers, everything we've read about Outlaw from the organization in the past year has been glowing. Trading him for a 6' bench player who can't shoot seems dumb to me. Of course, any deal or draft pick can be justified by assessing hypothetical values on players according to their team.

Maybe Kevin McHale sees Randy Foye as more valuable than he would Brandon Roy. Perhaps Memphis is pleased at what they received for Pau Gasol. Since I can't possibly know the real answer to these scenarios, I will continue to offer my opinions instead. Since some people can't seem to handle an opinion that differs from their opinion (not meaning you, NateBishop3), I suggest them putting me on ignore. As for salary-to-scoring ratio, that is simply one way to assess value; in this instance, it is something that would worry me in a trade for a player that is small and can't shoot.

I'd be interested in a polling of league coaches and GMs as to which opposing player gets more of their attention: Travis Outlaw or Kyle Lowry.


----------



## wastro

I know I'm way late to the party here, but I just thought I'd remind everyone that Quick has said that the Blazers view Outlaw as almost as important as The Big Three. Would they offer up someone they think so highly of for an unproven PG? I don't think so.

I think the initial article was based on rumors and here say, so I don't see any reason to get worked up over it.


----------



## c_note

Ed O said:


> Do you get words confused on purpose, or are you incapable of discerning nuances in the English language?
> 
> I'm not arguing about value when I discuss whether he starts or not. You bringing it up is a straw man.
> 
> Webster starts, and has started, presumably because Nate believes he is a better player. There is NO REASON that McMillan could not both start Outlaw AND have him finish games... in fact, most good players in the NBA do both of those things.
> 
> Outlaw has, undoubtedly, hit a couple big shots for the Blazers. That's great. He still hasn't been good enough to start more than a handful of games as a Blazer, and he has a player who's a couple of years younger than he starting ahead of him.
> 
> Ed O.


PapaG is definitely winning this argument against you. He makes valid points, and all you can do is argue semantics and BS. That's a really sad counter-attack to mount.

In fact, if you had followed the team closely AT ALL last year, it was mentioned myriad times by both McMillan and Rice/Barrett that Outlaw comes off the bench for MANY REASONS.

1. He PREFERRED coming off the bench.
2. He historically provided a more consistent spark to the 2nd unit than Webster has. 
3. Webster was a better outside shooter when the season began, although Outlaw improved tremendously. They needed the outside shooting in the 1st unit. Therefore, +1 for Webster.


And I think the biggest point, which PapaG already made...is...just look at who ends the games. Last time I checked, the end of the games would hold more weight in determining who the best players were, as compared to the start.

You just like arguing for the hell of it. Too bad you lost this one.


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> The late game stats posted by B-Roy show that Outlaw scores more and shoots better when the game matters.
> 
> Pritchard would be a laughingstock if he traded Outlaw for Lowry straight-up. A 6' PG who shoots 26% from 3 PT range and 70% from the FT line and who would never see the court in Portland. This thought makes me a "trip".


I guess scoring is the only thing that matters right?

I've answered this before, but I'll answer it again.

The clutch stats are *very* comparable. Lowry did what he had to do as a point guard, which was distributing the ball at a high rate. 6.5 puts him in the top 30. The stats also suggest, that when he could not find a teammate, he would try to score points himself, which is why he was only assisted on 9% of his clutch shots. He converted his field goals at a relatively lower rate, 34%, but was still able to score a very good amount because of how many times his drives ended up in free throws. Contrary to popular belief, 3 point shooting is not something we absolutely have to have at the point guard position, so that point is useless.

I am not, however, trying to detract from Travis Outlaw. During clutch situations, his high scoring and scoring percentages are just what was needed from him. Never did I say, though, that Outlaw was better than Lowry, or that Lowry was better than Outlaw. The only thing I said, was that all things considered, both players are very comparable, and trading one for the other would not be a travesty. I wouldn't personally do the trade, because I feel our SF spot is weaker than out PG spot, given Roy, Rudy, Blake and Bayless.

Clutch stats also don't determine who is a better player, Outlaw is a very mediocre to bad defender, whereas Lowry is a good defender (at least according to people who have watched him play). The stats don't lie either, Lowry drew 47 charges last year, 5th in the league. That alone is probably not enough to gauge his overall defense, but it does show you what type of player he is. He's a player who's willing to put his body on the line. Also, players who draw lots of charges are generally pretty good defenders. (ala Przybilla, Battier, J Smoove, Fisher, etc.)

As for Memphis losing more games in the clutch. That is to be expected. Both players played a significant role for their teams during clutch situations. However, Portland had the luxury of players like Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge, along with a Travis Outlaw. Memphis had Rudy Gay, Kyle Lowry, and that's about it. It doesn't make sense to pin losses solely on the actions of one player. That's just stupid.

Again, I'm not sure either player is better than the other, but to not even consider the notion that Lowry may be better, is ignorant.



> And I think the biggest point, which PapaG already made...is...just look at who ends the games. Last time I checked, the end of the games would hold more weight in determining who the best players were, as compared to the start.


Lowry ends most of Memphis's games too. What's your point?


----------



## c_note

B-Roy said:


> Lowry ends most of Memphis's games too. What's your point?


I wasn't comparing Lowry and Outlaw, it's apples and oranges.

I was talking about Webster vs. Outlaw.

Most of the time, the starting 5 are your best players. However, I think the situation last year for the Blazers was an exception. Outlaw was clearly a better player last year.


----------



## B-Roy

c_note said:


> I wasn't comparing Lowry and Outlaw, it's apples and oranges.
> 
> I was talking about Webster vs. Outlaw.
> 
> Most of the time, the starting 5 are your best players. However, I think the situation last year for the Blazers was an exception. Outlaw was clearly a better player last year.


Fair enough. I just assumed this because one of PapaG's arguments was that Lowry wasn't good enough to start games. The same rules that apply to Outlaw also apply to Lowry.


----------



## NateBishop3

PapaG said:


> What talents does Lowry have that the Blazers need? Horrible 3 Pt shooting? Below average size?
> 
> He is simply not needed on this team. Is Outlaw needed? I'm not sure, but getting a non-factor like Kyle Lowry in exchange would be awful. There would have to be better deals available for Outlaw, and since Outlaw clearly does have value to the team, why trade him for someone who would likely be the 3rd string PG at best?
> 
> So, when this trade doesn't go down, I'll be sure to bump it back to the top of the forum.
> 
> As for value to the Blazers, everything we've read about Outlaw from the organization in the past year has been glowing. Trading him for a 6' bench player who can't shoot seems dumb to me. Of course, any deal or draft pick can be justified by assessing hypothetical values on players according to their team.
> 
> Maybe Kevin McHale sees Randy Foye as more valuable than he would Brandon Roy. Perhaps Memphis is pleased at what they received for Pau Gasol. Since I can't possibly know the real answer to these scenarios, I will continue to offer my opinions instead. Since some people can't seem to handle an opinion that differs from their opinion (not meaning you, NateBishop3), I suggest them putting me on ignore. As for salary-to-scoring ratio, that is simply one way to assess value; in this instance, it is something that would worry me in a trade for a player that is small and can't shoot.
> 
> I'd be interested in a polling of league coaches and GMs as to which opposing player gets more of their attention: Travis Outlaw or Kyle Lowry.


Well, like I said, I have very little to go off of for Lowry. I haven't seen him play much, if at all. 

Going from what others have said, let's assume that Lowry's strengths are defense, passing, and going to the hole. Do we have anyone on our roster that you would say covers those strengths at the point guard position? Blake? Not really. Bayless? No. Sergio? Hardly. Blake and Sergio are supposed to be passers with a streaky jump shot, and Bayless is a pure scorer. So the addition of a sold defender at the point guard position could be useful to this team.

One of my favorite players on the team back in the late 90's early 00's was Greg Anthony. Greg's strength was defense and shooting. He was a savvy veteran who helped us beat the Jazz in the playoffs. I would LOVE to have Greg Anthony on this team (in his prime). Is Kyle Lowry that guy? Who knows. Shooting can be improved upon, but is his defense on that level? 

Anyway, I'm not saying I agree with a trade that would send Travis to Memphis for Lowry, but I could see this team upgrading our backcourt. If Bayless will be the eventual starter, with Roy as the other guard, why not bring in someone who can simply pass and defend? I don't think Sergio will be on this team a lot longer, and Blake has always been a stop-gap of sorts.


----------



## c_note

Man I loved Greg Anthony too. He would sub into a game and single-handedly turn the tide solely with his defense. It was like clockwork.


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> As for value to the Blazers, everything we've read about Outlaw from the organization in the past year has been glowing. Trading him for a 6' bench player who can't shoot seems dumb to me.


Outlaw shoots 43.3% for the game, Lowry shoots 43.2%.

If you mean 3 point percentage, then Lowry is clearly not someone to go to, but 3P% is not something we really need from the PG position.


----------



## drexlersdad

when outlaw is on, shaking his defender and pulling up for the j, he reminds me of tracy mcgrady. 

and i am 100% sure i am not the only one who thinks that.

if he had the rest of mcgradys game, he would be a superstar.

he doesnt.

that doesnt mean he cant be an above average overall player, and a huge part of any success we hope to accomplish.

outlaw is pretty darn good, and we have 2 more years to figure out just how good he can eventually be. that is our luxury.

i cant wait for the season to start so we can see what the team really needs to get to the next level. be it shooting, defense, slashing, blocks, steals, what the **** ever, that will be infinitely more exciting, i simply can NOT wait for the season to start.


----------



## NateBishop3

drexlersdad said:


> when outlaw is on, shaking his defender and pulling up for the j, he reminds me of tracy mcgrady.
> 
> and i am 100% sure i am not the only one who thinks that.
> 
> if he had the rest of mcgradys game, he would be a superstar.
> 
> he doesnt.
> 
> that doesnt mean he cant be an above average overall player, and a huge part of any success we hope to accomplish.
> 
> outlaw is pretty darn good, and we have 2 more years to figure out just how good he can eventually be. that is our luxury.
> 
> i cant wait for the season to start so we can see what the team really needs to get to the next level. be it shooting, defense, slashing, blocks, steals, what the **** ever, that will be infinitely more exciting, i simply can NOT wait for the season to start.


Except there's one major difference between Travis and Tracy. IQ. I'm trying real hard not to be a jerk and rag on Travis because he was a very cool guy when I knew him, but he has certain limitations. Limitations that can't be worked on. He'll never get around those.


----------



## drexlersdad

NateBishop3 said:


> One of my favorite players on the team back in the late 90's early 00's was Greg Anthony. Greg's strength was defense and shooting. He was a savvy veteran who helped us beat the Jazz in the playoffs. I would LOVE to have Greg Anthony on this team (in his prime). Is Kyle Lowry that guy? Who knows. Shooting can be improved upon, but is his defense on that level?
> 
> Anyway, I'm not saying I agree with a trade that would send Travis to Memphis for Lowry, but I could see this team upgrading our backcourt. If Bayless will be the eventual starter, with Roy as the other guard, why not bring in someone who can simply pass and defend? I don't think Sergio will be on this team a lot longer, and Blake has always been a stop-gap of sorts.


i would love to get a greg anthony.

the best thing about those types of players is that you can sign them for the minimum every year.


----------



## drexlersdad

NateBishop3 said:


> Except there's one major difference between Travis and Tracy. IQ. I'm trying real hard not to be a jerk and rag on Travis because he was a very cool guy when I knew him, but he has certain limitations. Limitations that can't be worked on. He'll never get around those.


i have a feeling his pull up jumper has nothing to do with these "limitations" you speak of.


----------



## B-Roy

drexlersdad said:


> i have a feeling his pull up jumper has nothing to do with these "limitations" you speak of.


The times when he takes them though, do.


----------



## drexlersdad

B-Roy said:


> The times when he takes them though, do.


really?

shooting percentages:

overall

travis .433

mcgrady .417

3 point

travis .396

mcrady .292

ummm free throws...

travis .741

mcgrady .684

mcgrady is a better passer.

outlaw is a better rebounder.


----------



## NateBishop3

drexlersdad said:


> really?
> 
> shooting percentages:
> 
> overall
> 
> travis .433
> 
> mcgrady .417
> 
> 3 point
> 
> travis .396
> 
> mcrady .292
> 
> ummm free throws...
> 
> travis .741
> 
> mcgrady .684
> 
> mcgrady is a better passer.
> 
> outlaw is a better rebounder.


I'll say this, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. I hope Travis becomes an All-Star. I'm not rooting against him. I just don't think he has the "basketball IQ" to be that guy. I've talked to a lot of super star players (well, I was part of the after game press conferences, I never got a question in). They all seem very polished, well spoken, intelligent. Not necessarily rocket scientists, but not dummies either. Travis isn't that guy.


----------



## zagsfan20

B-Roy said:


> I guess scoring is the only thing that matters right?
> 
> I've answered this before, but I'll answer it again.
> 
> The clutch stats are *very* comparable. Lowry did what he had to do as a point guard, which was distributing the ball at a high rate. 6.5 puts him in the top 30. The stats also suggest, that when he could not find a teammate, he would try to score points himself, which is why he was only assisted on 9% of his clutch shots. He converted his field goals at a relatively lower rate, 34%, but was still able to score a very good amount because of how many times his drives ended up in free throws. Contrary to popular belief, 3 point shooting is not something we absolutely have to have at the point guard position, so that point is useless.
> 
> I am not, however, trying to detract from Travis Outlaw. During clutch situations, his high scoring and scoring percentages are just what was needed from him. Never did I say, though, that Outlaw was better than Lowry, or that Lowry was better than Outlaw. The only thing I said, was that all things considered, both players are very comparable, and trading one for the other would not be a travesty. I wouldn't personally do the trade, because I feel our SF spot is weaker than out PG spot, given Roy, Rudy, Blake and Bayless.
> 
> Clutch stats also don't determine who is a better player, Outlaw is a very mediocre to bad defender, whereas Lowry is a good defender (at least according to people who have watched him play). The stats don't lie either, Lowry drew 47 charges last year, 5th in the league. That alone is probably not enough to gauge his overall defense, but it does show you what type of player he is. He's a player who's willing to put his body on the line. Also, players who draw lots of charges are generally pretty good defenders. (ala Przybilla, Battier, J Smoove, Fisher, etc.)
> 
> As for Memphis losing more games in the clutch. That is to be expected. Both players played a significant role for their teams during clutch situations. However, Portland had the luxury of players like Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge, along with a Travis Outlaw. Memphis had Rudy Gay, Kyle Lowry, and that's about it. It doesn't make sense to pin losses solely on the actions of one player. That's just stupid.
> 
> Again, I'm not sure either player is better than the other, but to not even consider the notion that Lowry may be better, is ignorant.
> 
> 
> 
> Lowry ends most of Memphis's games too. What's your point?


You're right, Lowry is a god.


----------



## Zybot

zagsfan20 said:


> You're right, Lowry is a god.


Separation of church and state dude. Save that BS for the Off Topic forum. :biggrin:


----------



## crowTrobot

B-Roy said:


> but 3P% is not something we really need from the PG position.



wrong. with roy playing it's what we need from our PG more than anything else.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> Outlaw shoots 43.3% for the game, Lowry shoots 43.2%.
> 
> If you mean 3 point percentage, then Lowry is clearly not someone to go to, *but 3P% is not something we really need from the PG position*.


Really? How do you figure this to be the case. As I have stated earlier, when the game is on the line, Brandon Roy is basically the person who initiates the offense, he can get to the rim, so what purpose does a 6' PG who can't shoot serve? I also keep hearing about Lowry's stellar defense, but the Memphis stats show them to be a very poor defensive team, and 6' PGs can be abused in the post by a bigger opponent no matter who quick they are. 

Kyle Lowry has played one full season for a team that won 22 games and that went 5-16 in games decided by 5 pts or less.

It's funny, but an off-hand comment about people overvaluing Outlaw has morphed into a debate where people are seemingly willing to trade him away for other teams' table scraps.


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> Really? How do you figure this to be the case. As I have stated earlier, when the game is on the line, Brandon Roy is basically the person who initiates the offense, he can get to the rim, so what purpose does a 6' PG who can't shoot serve? I also keep hearing about Lowry's stellar defense, but the Memphis stats show them to be a very poor defensive team, and 6' PGs can be abused in the post by a bigger opponent no matter who quick they are.
> 
> Kyle Lowry has played one full season for a team that won 22 games and that went 5-16 in games decided by 5 pts or less.
> 
> It's funny, but an off-hand comment about people overvaluing Outlaw has morphed into a debate where people are seemingly willing to trade him away for other teams' table scraps.


Because we have lots of 3 point shooters. Channing is working on his 3 point shot, Roy has been working on his 3 point shot all summer. Martell can shoot the three, especially if he's hot. Outlaw, although he doesn't take many, is also a respectable 3 point shooter. And we all know Rudy has long range. 

Let's go by your logic. Portland won a bunch of clutch games last year correct? Well during those games, many times, the point guard that was playing was Jarrett Jack. Jack's strength was never 3 point shooting, yet it didn't affect us that much, did it?

Besides, and for the last time, clutch stats don't determine the overall quality of a player. It's a nice stat to have, but it's not necessary. If anything, IF we traded Outlaw for Lowry, if you're so concerned about his 3 point shooting, we could always use Bayless or Rudy at the point.

I love how you try and punish Lowry over and over for how bad his team was. If you can't understand that team defense isn't the same as man defense, then I don't know what to say to you. Even adding a Bruce Bowen type player to last years Grizzlies would not have improved them very much, because the team was just overall bad.

Lowry table scraps? Hardly.


----------



## B-Roy

zagsfan20 said:


> You're right, Lowry is a god.


Nice attempt, but you fail.


----------



## Tortimer

I think if KP is trying to make a trade for a Memphis PG it would be Conley IMO. I was always wanting to trade for Conley but now having Bayless and Rudy I'm not really wanting to give up Outlaw plus probably more for Conley. I would rather have Conley then Lowry because of possibly more upside. The only way I would think about trading for Conley or Lowry is if KP/Nate thought Rudy is our SF of the future. I'm not sure Rudy is ever going to be a starting SF but maybe. I do think it would be a good idea to play Roy/Bayless and Rudy together against some teams depending on their SF.


----------



## B-Roy

Tortimer said:


> I think if KP is trying to make a trade for a Memphis PG it would be Conley IMO. I was always wanting to trade for Conley but now having Bayless and Rudy I'm not really wanting to give up Outlaw plus probably more for Conley. I would rather have Conley then Lowry because of possibly more upside. The only way I would think about trading for Conley or Lowry is if KP/Nate thought Rudy is our SF of the future. I'm not sure Rudy is ever going to be a starting SF but maybe. I do think it would be a good idea to play Roy/Bayless and Rudy together against some teams depending on their SF.


That's probably true, because Conley does have more upside. Stat wise, Lowry and Conley and about the same. Lowry is apparently, good on defense. Don't know much about Conleys.


----------



## Fork

The point isn't whether Outlaw is better than Webster. I would guess that Memphis feels, as most here seem to, that Outlaw is better than Webster too. And that's probably why they wouldn't consider a Webster for Lowry (much less Conley) trade. You can't argue that you'd rather do trade B if trade A is the only one the other team would consider.

The point is...is the available trade one that will help the team? I'd say it is, because Outlaw is vastly overrated.


----------



## MemphisX

Fork said:


> The point isn't whether Outlaw is better than Webster. I would guess that Memphis feels, as most here seem to, that Outlaw is better than Webster too. And that's probably why they wouldn't consider a Webster for Lowry (much less Conley) trade. You can't argue that you'd rather do trade B if trade A is the only one the other team would consider.
> 
> The point is...is the available trade one that will help the team? I'd say it is, because Outlaw is vastly overrated.


Actually I think Webster is a better long term prospect. I would prefer trading Lowry for Webster. Infact, I would do that before Lowry for Outlaw.

As far as this report, the writer usually only reports things that he has heard from actual Grizz sources. He is not one to print baseless rumors.


----------



## Ballscientist

Why don't you trade Outlaw to Rockets for Aaron Brooks and a piece of Berry?

Brooks has a lot of fans in Portland.


----------



## Minstrel

PapaG said:


> people are seemingly willing to trade him away for other teams' table scraps.


Very few people other than you consider Lowry to be "table scraps" or a low-value player. Your constant derision for Lowry, as though he's a scrub, weakens your credibility. Asserting that Outlaw is a low-value scrub would also weaken a person's credibility, but no one is saying that.

Lowry has a decent Assist Rate and TS% (a measure of scoring efficiency based on points per minute). Most people consider him a strong defender. He's only 21, so still quite a way from his prime value. He also rebounds well for a point guard. A point guard who scores efficiently, passes well, plays strong defense and even rebounds well for his position, and has upside potential remaining, is a pretty valuable player.


----------



## MrJayremmie

> Why don't you trade Outlaw to Rockets for Aaron Brooks and a piece of Berry?
> 
> Brooks has a lot of fans in Portland.


By piece of Berry, are you talkin' about Brent Barry? If you are, we really don't need to trade a SF for a PG and SG, when we are loaded at the PG and SG position, and there will already be a lot of competition for little playing time.


----------



## Sambonius

It's a silly argument. Lowry is a pretty decent prospect, but Outlaw is a more proven commodity. Outlaw has more value than Lowry, I don't think that is debatable. This trade won't be happening.


----------



## Da_O

Okay Okay lets do this trade
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...17~2015~3195~3005&teams=29~29~22~22&te=&cash=

LOL


----------



## Minstrel

Da_O said:


> Okay Okay lets do this trade
> http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...17~2015~3195~3005&teams=29~29~22~22&te=&cash=
> 
> LOL


Can we get Lowry instead of Conley Jr?  I'd do the deal either way, of course, but I actually like Lowry more. Better defense, more efficient scorer, better rebounder.

Adding Gay to Oden/Roy/Aldridge would be a bit ridiculous.


----------



## Da_O

Minstrel said:


> Can we get Lowry instead of Conley Jr?  I'd do the deal either way, of course, but I actually like Lowry more. Better defense, more efficient scorer, better rebounder.
> 
> Adding Gay to Oden/Roy/Aldridge would be a bit ridiculous.


Gotcha here we are
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...05~3012~3417~2015&teams=22~22~29~29&te=&cash=

Even though I doubt a trade even gets done.


----------



## B-Roy

Sambonius said:


> It's a silly argument. Lowry is a pretty decent prospect, *but Outlaw is a more proven commodity.* Outlaw has more value than Lowry, I don't think that is debatable. This trade won't be happening.


Explain.


----------



## Sambonius

B-Roy said:


> Explain.


Look at the numbers. Outlaw did his damage coming off the bench for a 500 team, meanwhile Lowry's production and lack there of has been wildly inconsistent for a team in the gutter. And I'm one who thinks Outlaw is overrated on these boards, but this is a rediculous comparison. I like Lowry too.


----------



## B-Roy

Sambonius said:


> Look at the numbers. Outlaw did his damage coming off the bench for a 500 team, meanwhile Lowry's production and lack there of has been wildly inconsistent for a team in the gutter. And I'm one who thinks Outlaw is overrated on these boards, but this is a rediculous comparison. I like Lowry too.


I'm looking at the numbers, and there's nothing there that looks like Outlaw did more damage.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> I'm looking at the numbers, and there's nothing there that looks like Outlaw did more damage.


Except for the long posts you provided that prove that he did more damage.


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> Except for the long posts you provided that prove that he did more damage.


You're even more delusional than I thought.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> You're even more delusional than I thought.


Totally unnecessary.


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> Totally unnecessary.


If you can't understand analysis then what more is there to say to you?


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> If you can't understand analysis then what more is there to say to you?



I already illustrated how the numbers you provided are in Outlaw's favor pretty much across the board. You even tried to equate 50% FG with 34% FG.

Travis Outlaw is a better player than Kyle Lowry. This is my opinion, and I don't see how this makes me delusional. In the old days, mods would clean up these ad hominem attacks.


----------



## PapaG

PapaG said:


> Of course not, but if he is scoring more than Lowry, and shooting better than Lowry, and winning more than Lowry, both in terms of an entire game and in the clutch, I'm trying to understand how Lowry is better?
> 
> Or am I still being "ignorant"?


I am "delusional" and "ignorant" because I feel that Travis Outlaw has more value than Kyle Lowry.

This board is going down the tubes.


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> I already illustrated how the numbers you provided are in Outlaw's favor pretty much across the board. You even tried to equate 50% FG with 34% FG.
> 
> Travis Outlaw is a better player than Kyle Lowry. This is my opinion, and I don't see how this makes me delusional. In the old days, mods would clean up these ad hominem attacks.


You're delusional because you like to purposely misinterpret my posts.

I've answered all of your arguments in my posts. If you don't want to read them, that's fine with me.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> You're delusional because you like to purposely misinterpret my posts.
> 
> I've answered all of your arguments in my posts. If you don't want to read them, that's fine with me.


You've answered them, and me not being impressed enough to change my mind makes me "delusional" and "ignorant".

Tolerance rocks.


----------



## Sambonius

B-Roy said:


> I'm looking at the numbers, and there's nothing there that looks like Outlaw did more damage.


Really? Outlaw averaged almost 3.5 points more, shot a higher 3 point percentage, shot a higher free throw percentage, got 1.5 more rebounds per game, did better in blocks per game, had less turnovers, and managed to foul less while playing only 1 minute more per game. Not to mention Travis Outlaw scores more in the 4th quarter, when it really counts. I'm not saying Lowry is Tracy Murray to Travis' Lebron James. I'm saying that Travis is a better player right now and is more productive. The stats above prove it. I have trouble seeing how you aren't able to see that Travis does more damage than Lowry. 

Care to look at the numbers again?


----------



## B-Roy

PapaG said:


> You've answered them, and me not being impressed enough to change my mind makes me "delusional" and "ignorant".
> 
> Tolerance rocks.


Keep misinterpreting my posts. You're doing a great job.


----------



## B-Roy

Sambonius said:


> Really? Outlaw averaged almost 3.5 points more, shot a higher 3 point percentage, shot a higher free throw percentage, got 1.5 more rebounds per game, did better in blocks per game, had less turnovers, and managed to foul less while playing only 1 minute more per game. Not to mention Travis Outlaw scores more in the 4th quarter, when it really counts. I'm not saying Lowry is Tracy Murray to Travis' Lebron James. I'm saying that Travis is a better player right now and is more productive. The stats above prove it. I have trouble seeing how you aren't able to see that Travis does more damage than Lowry.
> 
> Care to look at the numbers again?


Outlaw scores more because that's what he's supposed to do. He rebounds more because he's 9 inches taller (and still a poor rebounder for his size). He blocks more because he's taller, has less turnovers because he handles the ball less. 

It's like people are choosing to ignore certain stats, while not even thinking about why certain players are better in certain categories.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> Keep misinterpreting my posts. You're doing a great job.



It's impossible to misinterpret being called "ignorant" and "delusional", although I will say that you doing so doesn't exactly bolster your argument.


----------



## wizmentor

Lowry doesn't have a role on this team, Travis does. The debate should be more like Lowry vs. Steve Blake, because if we trade for Lowry that's whose minutes he would be taking....

...and we don't need to get younger without serious (Bayless-like) upside which I'm not sure Lowry has.


----------



## PapaG

B-Roy said:


> Outlaw scores more because that's what he's supposed to do. He rebounds more because he's 9 inches taller (and still a poor rebounder for his size). He blocks more because he's taller, has less turnovers because he handles the ball less.
> 
> *It's like people are choosing to ignore certain stats*, while not even thinking about why certain players are better in certain categories.


So what's Lowry supposed to do? Shoot poorly, lose close games, average a relatively low assist/48 min, and play "good defense" for the worst defensive team in the league?


----------



## Sambonius

B-Roy said:


> Outlaw scores more because that's what he's supposed to do. He rebounds more because he's 9 inches taller (and still a poor rebounder for his size). He blocks more because he's taller, has less turnovers because he handles the ball less.
> 
> It's like people are choosing to ignore certain stats, while not even thinking about why certain players are better in certain categories.


All that you say is correct, but the fact remains that he does MORE damage than Lowry in the games he plays. Also, is Outlaw supposed to shoot a higher FT % too?


----------



## RoseCity

drexlersdad said:


> outlaw is pretty darn good, and we have 2 more years to figure out just how good he can eventually be. that is our luxury.
> 
> i cant wait for the season to start so we can see what the team really needs to get to the next level. be it shooting, defense, slashing, blocks, steals, what the **** ever, that will be infinitely more exciting, i simply can NOT wait for the season to start.


I just wanted to put emphasis on your point above... We still haven't seen this group play together + Oden, Bayless and Rudy. Maybe Pritch is getting the old Trader Bob disease...I hope not. He seems smart enough to watch this group gel for 3+ months and go from there before making any big trades. Maybe Rudy bombs or a wing gets hurt or Outlaw proves to be a perfect compliment to Roy and Bayless. etcetera.


----------



## PapaG

RoseCity said:


> I just wanted to put emphasis on your point above... We still haven't seen this group play together + Oden, Bayless and Rudy. Maybe Pritch is getting the old Trader Bob disease...I hope not. He seems smart enough to watch this group gel for 3+ months and go from there before making any big trades. Maybe Rudy bombs or a wing gets hurt or Outlaw proves to be a perfect compliment to Roy and Bayless. etcetera.


It is well known that Pritchard works the phone and throws out random deals like few others.

IF KP did call and offer Outlaw for either Crittenton or Lowry straight-up, and IF Memphis took more than 30 seconds to mull the offer before jumping on it, well, there are reasons they are a garbage team right now, and carrying 3 PGs who can't shoot is one of them.


----------



## SheedSoNasty

I haven't watched Lowry much, but I don't really want to see is make any moves until we really see what we have. We have plenty of depth at every position to stay competitive and I'm feeling that we have a strong nucleus with the players we already have. Therefore, I say "no" to any realistic trade possibilities for the time being.


----------



## darkhelmit54

What about Blake/Outlaw for Buckner/Conley

I mean, it'd be a big risk, leaving us with really not established PG's, but could pay off bigtime, and it opens up playing time for many (including RUDY). We'd definetely accelerate Bayless and Rudy's development, give Sergio a last chance, and get GO his old running mate. I would also think it'd help our running game, a move like this would basically mean that we played a lot of 3guard lineups but I think that'd be fine with how athletic our bigs behind them are.

Conley(20)/Bayless(15)/Rodriguez(15)
Roy(20)/Fernandez(18)
Webster(30)/Roy(18)
Aldridge(30)/Frye(18)
Oden(30)/Pryzbilla(18)

Odd men out: Batum, Diogu, Buckner

Now obviously this team is young and inexperienced (youngest in NBA history?). But it has loads of pure talent, forces Roy into a leadership role (not a bad thing), would be counting on Webster to step it up, and would play with a chip on its shoulder. Bayless, Rodriguez, and Fernandez' play would all be inconsistent I think, but between the three you could count on at least one of them having a good game and playing 25 minutes, leaving the other two to play less that game. KP is a gambler...but would nate kill him?


----------



## MARIS61

Memphis should be on KP's "DO NOT TRADE WITH" list.

They got nothing we need.

TO's better than any of them.


----------



## dwood615

i dont get this deal or the bulls deal....makes no sense


----------



## craigehlo

MARIS61 said:


> Memphis should be on KP's "DO NOT TRADE WITH" list.
> 
> They got nothing we need.
> 
> TO's better than any of them.


TO isn't better than Rudy Gay of OJ Mayo, so let's just relax with that hyperbole. 

For a 1st year PG, Conley showed some nice improvement at the end of the season especially with a rebuilding team that traded away their centerpiece midseason. 

I think the real point behind a lot of the these TO trade rumors is that KP thinks that Outlaw might have reached his ceiling. I would tend to agree.


----------



## NateBishop3

craigehlo said:


> I think the real point behind a lot of the these TO trade rumors is that KP thinks that Outlaw might have reached his ceiling. I would tend to agree.


I agree.


----------



## nikolokolus

craigehlo said:


> TO isn't better than Rudy Gay of OJ Mayo, so let's just relax with that hyperbole.
> 
> For a 1st year PG, Conley showed some nice improvement at the end of the season especially with a rebuilding team that traded away their centerpiece midseason.
> 
> *I think the real point behind a lot of the these TO trade rumors is that KP thinks that Outlaw might have reached his ceiling. I would tend to agree.*


Couldn't agree more. This is especially true when I start thinking about the kind of players that are going to be on our second/third unit next season: Bayless, Rudy, Channing, Diogu -- all players who (on paper at least) seem to be scorers who either drive, shoot, or post up (or a combination thereof), leaving the tweener Travis somewhat redundant or likely to see his role as a shoot first sparkplug off the bench diminished. If these rumors are true then it sounds like KP is being proactive and trying to sell high, I can't fault him for that.


----------



## MrJayremmie

IF, Outlaw has run his course with this team (which i don't think he has, because we need to see how he works with Greg... at least through camp), then i'd much prefer him being traded for a starting SF like Prince or Battier, along with Raef, Diogu, Sergio and a 1st if possible. We can take back contracts if we can get our hands on a nice vet like that, because if we aquired one of them, i don't think we would need to get anything from the Free Agent class (which isn't very good) next year.

I don't think we need ANY more guards at all. We are LOADED at the 1 and 2 spot, imo.

But right now, I think the key is patience to see how this team works together. We can decide who fits and who doesn't through camp and pre-season, and EVEN up until the deadline.


----------



## gatorpops

nikolokolus said:


> Couldn't agree more. This is especially true when I start thinking about the kind of players that are going to be on our second/third unit next season: Bayless, Rudy, Channing, Diogu -- all players who (on paper at least) seem to be scorers who either drive, shoot, or post up (or a combination thereof), leaving the tweener Travis somewhat redundant or likely to see his role as a shoot first sparkplug off the bench diminished. If these rumors are true then it sounds like KP is being proactive and trying to sell high, I can't fault him for that.


Outlaw's greatest strength is that he can get that jumper over anyone but is weak in driving and not very basketball intelligent. 

He does not rebound very well for his ability to jump out of the building and is not that great of a man-on-man defender. 

His role has greatly decreased this year because we have Jerryd and Rudy who are both much more agile and able to get their shot on their own with a better possibility of getting fouled. 

If only Sergio had developed better, he is the passer and has great handles - oh well.............

g


----------



## e_blazer1

craigehlo said:


> I think the real point behind a lot of the these TO trade rumors is that KP thinks that Outlaw might have reached his ceiling.


Isn't there something wrong from a logic standpoint in using trade rumors to infer what KP may be thinking about a player's ceiling? About the most you can deduce is that *some fans* believe that KP *may* be thinking that Outlaw might have reached his ceiling and therefore is looking to trade him. 

I find it interesting that none of the local media seem to be reporting anything about either the Chicago or Memphis rumors.


----------



## Five5even

The Memphis trade rumor has popped up on 95.5 the game periodically throughout the day. Nothing on the Bulls rumor though. I would recommend tuning in at 6 for Wheels after work, my guess is he will talk about it.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

It must be off season because we (or maybe just me) are way over analysing this rumor. But here I go jumping in some more:

Lowry: don't know much about him (although much more than 3 days ago), but here why I think there isn't much to this guy . . . if Lowry is this good future NBA PG, why did they draft Conley (PG)with a high draft pick the very next year. And then that same year they make a trade and Crittenton (PG/SG) is a big part of it when Lakers had lots of young prospects at different postions. Then this draft the get Love and trade him for Mayo (PG/SG). I don't think Memephis is committed to Lowry as the future PG or (maybe not even back up PG) . . . I wonder why and conclude they figure he is a jorneyman PG. Probably flawed logic but a different analysis.

Outlaw: I got to run so my quick concern is maybe Outlaw is a player without a postion. There is talk about Outlaw playing SF . . . well why didn't he do that last year? Why did they even start him as backup PF with Frye on the team? Maybe Blazers don't see Travis being able to play SF and too small for PF so they are trying to move him while he is hot? If Webster has a breakout year (like TO), do you even need TO? 


Again just having fun with a rumor that will not happen.


----------



## PapaG

PapaG said:


> What talents does Lowry have that the Blazers need? Horrible 3 Pt shooting? Below average size?
> 
> He is simply not needed on this team. Is Outlaw needed? I'm not sure, but getting a non-factor like Kyle Lowry in exchange would be awful. There would have to be better deals available for Outlaw, and since Outlaw clearly does have value to the team, why trade him for someone who would likely be the 3rd string PG at best?
> 
> *So, when this trade doesn't go down, I'll be sure to bump it back to the top of the forum.*
> 
> As for value to the Blazers, everything we've read about Outlaw from the organization in the past year has been glowing. Trading him for a 6' bench player who can't shoot seems dumb to me. Of course, any deal or draft pick can be justified by assessing hypothetical values on players according to their team.
> 
> Maybe Kevin McHale sees Randy Foye as more valuable than he would Brandon Roy. Perhaps Memphis is pleased at what they received for Pau Gasol. Since I can't possibly know the real answer to these scenarios, I will continue to offer my opinions instead. Since some people can't seem to handle an opinion that differs from their opinion (not meaning you, NateBishop3), I suggest them putting me on ignore. As for salary-to-scoring ratio, that is simply one way to assess value; in this instance, it is something that would worry me in a trade for a player that is small and can't shoot.
> 
> I'd be interested in a polling of league coaches and GMs as to which opposing player gets more of their attention: Travis Outlaw or Kyle Lowry.


1 day to go. Will this deal be made? :azdaja:


----------



## Damian Necronamous

If I had to guess, I'd say that Jefferson and Ridnour for Outlaw, Rodriguez, LaFrentz and possibly a draft pick will go down tomorrow.

PG: Steve Blake...*Luke Ridnour...Jerryd Bayless
SG: Brandon Roy...Rudy Fernandez
SF: Richard Jefferson...Nicolas Batum...*Martell Webster
PF: LaMarcus Aldridge...Channing Frye...Michael Ruffin
C: *Greg Oden...Joel Przybilla


----------

