# I am so sick of Outlaw...



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

I hate to do it... but I had to edit myself because I was absolutely wrong 

Cheers


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I never have been a big fan of his, I would trade him in a second along with some other pieces for a decent PG. I want to sign or trade for Matt Barnes this offseason. He is the ideal backup SF for the Blazers.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

What's wrong with having a young streaky scorer coming off the bench? Of the reasons we're not a good team, Travis Outlaw's contract is way WAY down the list.

Ed O.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

i don't mind T.O. Don't know what to expect out of him. He still seems like he has more atheltic ability than talent.

not a bad thing....he's a good guy off the bench


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

blah blah blah yes i am an idiot


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

while i agree that ime has better skills than outlaw, i like outlaws versatility in being able to play both the 3 and the 4 effectively. its not as if he is starting. we cant exactly expect ALL of our players to be world beaters.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

wow we must have lost again? always a thread like this when we lose


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Resume said:


> He is worthless. He is not worth the money. He is a streaky scorer at BEST. He will never be a consistent scorer. He has 1 good game every 2 weeks and you TO fans hold on to that for the whole year.
> 
> WE NEED TO OFF HIM. We should not have signed him. I would rather have Ime.
> 
> I officially decided I am OFF the Outlaw bandwagon.


Good. More room for me. Loved his hustle in the 2nd half tonight.

PBF


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

You can have all the room you want bro. Outlaw's wagon is a wreck waiting to happen.

He will never amount to anything in this league except a mediocre backup at best.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

I love Outlaw's athleticism, but I haven't seen that much progress from him over the years. His jump shot is a little more consistent now, but that's about it. I think he's about as good as he'll ever be, and that's not good enough.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

and that is why we have a bench. if outlaw has a bad outing, somebody else will step it up. we're not paying him to carry the team. we're paying him to bring 120% every game, and he does that.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Outlaw didn't score tonight, but he got some key rebounds and played some solid defense. Don't let the poor shooting fool you -- he played a part in the win tonight.


----------



## BengalDuck (Jun 19, 2004)

Outlaw shut down Gasol when he was in, and he hustled and got some big rebounds. I thought he had a great game today as a hustle-man off the bench.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

I've come to the same conclusion about Travis Outlaw. He's just a clutz. I've seen hardly any improvement from him since he's been a rookie. He's still just a guy who can jump really high and has a decent jump shot and will block an occasional shot.

Despite his length and athletisism, he's not a good finisher around the basket, he's turnover prone and doesn't play well within the offense because he doesn't really know how to pass. He also seems to struggle at perimeter defense. Every game, I get frustrated with his boneheaded plays.

When James Jones returns, I think he will take Outlaw's minutes. 

Next year, with Greg Oden and Rudy entering the rotation, Outlaw really won't have much of a chance at getting playing time. If we can get a good role player for him, that would be nice. But we'll probably just hold onto him until his contract is up and hope that, against the odds, he developes into a better player.


----------



## Freshtown (May 24, 2004)

man. there's some HATE in here for TO. Why? Dude is decent. He's not being paid more than he's worth.

Did anyone see his hustle in getting those second chance rebounds and points tonight?

He's not expected to be the franchise savior, or run the offense. His job is to shoot jumpers, get rebounds, and block shots. And I think he's pretty good at all those things. 

Did anyone see his backcourt steal to the and 1 layup tonight? Pretty sweet. I think he can contribute to any team he's on, and he's definitely not a player you throw out for nothing.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

I haven't gave up on TO, but I wish when his shot isn't dropping he'd take the ball to the basket. He doesn't seem to ever do that. I read Nate has confidence in him and tells him to keep shooting, but why doesn't he say take it to the basket more?

I didn't like how TO came into camp out of shape or the excuse he used. Most like his poor play has to do with him coming in to camp out of shape. Hopefully he will play out of it.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

mgb said:


> I haven't gave up on TO, but I wish when his shot isn't dropping he'd take the ball to the basket. He doesn't seem to ever do that.


unlike Roy, he just doesn't generally have the coordination to take more than two dribbles with the ball. which is fine for a bench player with the incredible elevation he's got. I'd rather see him rise up 8 inches over the defender and attempt an open 15 footer than have him drive into the lane and fumble the ball off his leg. 

he's in a funk right now with his shooting, but it's not like he's traditionally been a bad jump shooter:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3726
the prior two years he averaged 44%. that was pretty decent for a guy whose role is to come in off the bench and pretty much create your own jump shot, particularly when a play breaks down.

this year he's playing the same role, but shooting at 32%. it's only a few games into the year. jump shooters have bad streaks sometimes, and he's definitely in one.



> I didn't like how TO came into camp out of shape or the excuse he used. Most like his poor play has to do with him coming in to camp out of shape. Hopefully he will play out of it.


nobody likes to hear about a player coming in out of shape. he's young--hopefully he's learned that lesson. 

but at the same time I think it's pretty clear he's made a lot of personal progress:
1. when we drafted him he had no jump shot and no offensive moves. he now has range out to nearly the three point line, and he's got the dribble-to-the-foul-line/rise/shoot-at-apex move down pat. 

2. there are signs that he's finally learning to dribble. last night he deflected a pass, dribbled the length of the court, crossed over Pau Gasol, took the ball in hard, got the shot and the foul. I kept waiting for something bad to happen--that was exactly the kind of play he'd dribble off his foot or get called for charging just last year. huge progress. 

3. when was the last time you heard Nate complain about him being out of position on defense or on an offensive play? you still see it from time to time, but it's not like two years ago when he seemed to constantly be running into his own teammates. 

4. he's starting to embrace the idea of being a hustle player, as evidenced last night in the second half where he created deflections and dove for loose balls. 

Outlaw is young, he's cheap, he's a bench role player, he's an amazing athletic freak who still has a lot of upside, and he's a rare bench role player who can create his own shot at a decent clip. and despite what some are saying in this thread, he HAS made a lot of progress in his game. 

if Outlaw were shooting at 44% instead of 32% over these first six games, I don't think there'd be much reason to complain at all. in another six games I wouldn't be surprised at all if he's back up to his normal FG% and all is forgiven.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

Outlaw shot 43% from the field last year, that is not good for someone primarily in the game for their shooting. He hurts the team in other areas with his horrible passing (a worse black hole than ZBo) and his defensive lapses.

I agree with the Original Poster. For the last year I have believed that Outlaw will never amount to more than a bench player in this league. I wanted us to resign Ime instead as he would be a more steady influence and contribute to more victories this year. Yes I think getting wins for this team is important, it this team can sneak into the playoffs then next year they may be ready to get a 1st round win and the year after that compete for a title. Having a dumb player like Outlaw who has very limited upside while making bonehead plays hurts this teams long-term prospects.


----------



## moldorf (Jun 29, 2007)

Outlaw does seem to become generally ineffective when his shot isn't falling. And often, he can't seem to recognize the difference between a good shot and a bad shot, not only for him but for the flow of the offense.

Still, his ability to play both forward positions has value. And he is a good weakside defender. He's also no threat to be a locker room distraction or in a police report.

But his strongest asset may be the fact that next off-season, his contract will in effect be an expiring one. I think it's inevitable that Portland will make some moves next off-season. Maybe to try and move up in the draft will be the first priority, and Outlaw could end up being needed leverage.

sorry travis


----------



## Sug (Aug 7, 2006)

Travis Outlaw is a lot like Ruben Patterson. They both do nothing well enough consistantly to be a starter. The one thing they do consistantly is hustle and make things happen good or bad. They are high energy, and that can help you or hurt you. Last night I would say that TO was in the end a benefit because he made some plays that got the crowd into the game, and his mistakes clearly did not hurt us as we won with him playing 21 minutes. 

Here is why he is better than Ruben though. He is not insane, he does not think he could lead the team in scoring, and he is one of the nicest guys you will ever meet. The problem with professional sports is when you get fans that hate players who you drafted, developed, and watched grow they entire career in front of your very eyes. I mean if you look at Travis Outlaw today compared to when he came into the NBA you can't say the guy has not gotten better. He has gotten much better. His overall game is much better. He only played 19 minutes in his first season, and only 793 in his second. 

I love Travis Outlaw because he is a product of the Blazers organization, and he will probably be a Blazer for life. He is everything I would want my Blazers to be off the court, and at times he is downright on fire. He makes plays that make you go WOW, and yes he makes mistakes. 

Saying you need to off someone is not appropriate for this board btw.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

TO is a huge piece of our championship puzzle. He's young and incredibly gifted athletically.

I love his play and see consistent progress each season.

I've seen no basis at all for the "Travis is dumb" comments other than the usual racism expressed here.


----------



## majic_sean (Dec 22, 2004)

Sug said:


> I love Travis Outlaw because he is a product of the Blazers organization, and he will probably be a Blazer for life. He is everything I would want my Blazers to be off the court, and at times he is downright on fire. He makes plays that make you go WOW, and yes he makes mistakes.


Very nicely put. Almost brought a tear to my eye thinking of little Travis coming to age as a Blazer. He is a really nice guy and does a lot of positive things within the community. Very mild mannered and respectful.

I have always liked Travis and will always remember the dunk on Yao and the way he yelled like Garnett afterwards. One of the nasties things ever. Hasn't Travis been on the team the longest of the current roster players?

Wasn't Jermaine kinda a cluts and labeled a semi-bust after 4 years as a Blazer? Travis is the man! He has the closest jumper to Jordan I've ever seen and when he has his shot going he is unstoppable cause he jumps so high nobody can block him.

I remember the game against Phoenix last year when Travis was really on a roll, coming into the game and had put a few back to back solid games together where he had been getting to the hoop. He looked poised to break-out and he had a great game. With the game on the line and with time running out TO had the ball in his hands. He drove past his man and right at the hoop with the ball a good 6 inches above the rim a light went on in his head and he decided to roll the ball off his fingers instead of hammer it home. As the ball bounced off the iron as time expired and the fans all moaned, it seemed like all Travis' confidence in himself was shattered and he never has seemed to attack the rim much since then. 

Maybe Martell should advise Travis to see his shrink. 

I have a lot of love for TO. His upside right now in these growing stages seems to heavily outweigh the negative. Besides who else on the team has the cool wild west music play whenever they check in? 

I'm not on the Travis Outlaw bandwagon, I'm trying to help blaze the trail it follows.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Draco said:


> Outlaw shot 43% from the field last year, that is not good for someone primarily in the game for their shooting.


Outlaw's career average is 44.6%. 
Rip Hamilton's a career 45.1% shooter. 
Michael Redd is a a career 45.3% shooter. 

is Outlaw as good as Rip or Redd? clearly no. 

but to say Outlaw isn't a decent shooting bench player is just wrong. if you want a guy with Outlaw's athleticism and youth to also shoot 48% from the field, you aren't looking for a bench player who gets paid peanuts. you are asking for Manu Ginobili. guess what--the only team with a bench guy with that kind of quality is the Spurs. 

people sometimes hold Outlaw's incredible athleticism against him. they see this incredible leaper and wonder why he isn't a phenomenal dunker. the fact is that he just doesn't have the coordination (at least yet, maybe ever) to be more than a jump shooter on offense. he's made huge strides in that jump shot, though. 

yeah, he's got huge holes in his game, but so do most bench players. he's an athletic freak with a decent jump shot who will probably always be a bench role player. as long as we are paying him that way (we are) and using him that way (we are) I don't really see what the problem is.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Sug said:


> Travis Outlaw is a lot like Ruben Patterson. They both do nothing well enough consistantly to be a starter. The one thing they do consistantly is hustle and make things happen good or bad. They are high energy, and that can help you or hurt you. Last night I would say that TO was in the end a benefit because he made some plays that got the crowd into the game, and his mistakes clearly did not hurt us as we won with him playing 21 minutes.
> 
> Here is why he is better than Ruben though. He is not insane, he does not think he could lead the team in scoring, and he is one of the nicest guys you will ever meet. The problem with professional sports is when you get fans that hate players who you drafted, developed, and watched grow they entire career in front of your very eyes. I mean if you look at Travis Outlaw today compared to when he came into the NBA you can't say the guy has not gotten better. He has gotten much better. His overall game is much better. He only played 19 minutes in his first season, and only 793 in his second.
> 
> ...


Well said Sug... I agree


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Let's try to discuss basketball, not posters.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Outlaw is a servicable 9th man. What more could we ask for in him? Many teams would LOVE to have a elite athletic SF/PF who is still under 25 and making below the league average, all while coming off the bench. 

He isnt great, he might not fit into our long term plans but he is good at doing what he does. He is a offensive spark and despite his ball-hog'ishnes, he is the only guy after Roy who can really create his own shot off the dribble.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

Outlaw is a streaky player. I think he always will be. The thing that makes him more reliable (than in past years) is that he has value out there when he's not scoring. His jumper isn't landing right now, but he's defending & rebounding pretty well. He seems to be around every loose ball these days and I see more confidence and aggressiveness than before. I just don't think we're ever going to be able to count on him for a consistent 15 ppg. The only offensive move has is the step back jumper - He's not going to majically find body control, ball handling, etc. I think he'll be okay though if he embrases the "hustle player" persona. With the emergence of Martell and with LA, TO can forget about being a starter. He's probably a career b/u who mixes in a few 30 pt games that "wow" you. It's not like we're paying him to be whole lot more than what that is worth


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

He's like Ruben in the fact that he's too much of a loose cannon, and makes too many bone headed moves to warrent being a starter. But I think Patterson is obviously a better player than Outlaw. He's a very good one on one defender and had a great post up game. He's shot over 50% from the field for his career and is also a better rebounder.

The only advantage Outlaw has is a better jump shot, and the fact that he won't be a personal distraction.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

For all you piling on Outlaw, how many of you have piled on Webster in the last couple of years?


----------



## BenDavis503 (Apr 11, 2007)

PorterIn2004 said:


> For all you piling on Outlaw, how many of you have piled on Webster in the last couple of years?


Good point!


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Outlaw will never become a star, and will most likely not become a quality starter. However, I can see him becoming a great 6th man. It will take a little longer, but I think it could very well happen. He works his butt off on the court and at times has shown he can shoot very well. If he gets more consistent with his shooting he will be a an on and off starter in this league for years, but spend most of his time as 6th man.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

Ed O said:


> What's wrong with having a young streaky scorer coming off the bench? Of the reasons we're not a good team, Travis Outlaw's contract is way WAY down the list.
> 
> Ed O.


Exactly. What the hell do you expect, OP? 100% FG, 5 steals 5 blocks and 15 boards per game?

22 years old, 49 inch vertical, steady improvement, end of discussion.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

PorterIn2004 said:


> For all you piling on Outlaw, how many of you have piled on Webster in the last couple of years?


Yah.
Same ****, different year.
LOL


----------



## lyleb123 (Feb 12, 2007)

off the bench and Travis picked up an off night for Martell.


----------



## Weav (Mar 5, 2007)

Good game for Travis tonight...I cringed at those first two misses, but he really got his groove afterwards. That three in the corner was great, and it lit up the Garden. My real problem with TO is his inconsistency.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

I am pretty sure he read this. We should talk smack about him every day before he has a game. 

But seriously, he is talentd young guy who gets flack because he came into the league out of HS and in general Blazer fans dont like waiting for success. He will never be a starter or even a elite 6th man. But, once Rudy comes over I cant thin of a better 7th or 8th man. The thing keeping him from being starter quality is his inconsistency, and that can be overlooked when you are a bench player.


----------



## 2k (Dec 30, 2005)

Draco said:


> Outlaw shot 43% from the field last year, that is not good for someone primarily in the game for their shooting. He hurts the team in other areas with his horrible passing (a worse black hole than ZBo) and his defensive lapses.


His shooting certainly isn’t the primary reason he enters the game and his passing and court vision are improving.


----------



## Redbeard (Sep 11, 2005)

Haven't felt the need to post much lately, but I thought I would throw out a few points on this one.

After drafting Outlaw, I was excited that we might have found a steal in an undeveloped player.
This year I was torn between signing him or Ime, whom I still wish we had in Portland.

But, after last night, I understand where he fits.
Two nights in a row, he helped to stymie the opposing teams star forward, Gasol and then Nowitzki. I kept wondering why Aldridge wasn't in the game, but we were maintaining a 10 point lead and Dirk was frustrated and ineffective because Outlaw was constantly in his face and covering him, mainly due to his wing span and vertical ability. Dirk just couldn't get space to get over him.

Outlaw has gotten better every season. May not be leaps and bounds over the previous year, but he hasn't digressed. He was 18 when we drafted him and I am willing to bet the he was on the tail end of a huge growth spurt. Most of use are not going to be in full control of our bodies and muscles at that age. Further more, the brain isn't even fully developed until you are around 21.

He isn't a superstar, he isn't overpaid, he doesn't have the highest BBall IQ, but he has shown that he can learn, he can defend, he stays healthy, he stays out of trouble, he doesn't complain about coming off the bench or screw up the chemistry.

For the price it is worth seeing if he can continue to develop and get better. If we were looking at trying to get over the top and make it to the Finals this year, then I would think of trading him, but we are still trying to prove ourselves and don't need to mess with our effective bench players just yet.


----------



## HurraKane212 (Aug 2, 2007)

Outlaw IMO could be a lot like Tyrus Thomas is now if he steps it up defensively. TT is a great athletic defender/ shotblocker/ hustle player. However, his offensive game is still developing. I think TT will be the better player over all, but I think Trout can fit that mold very well. He'd be a perfect Jerome Kersey type player if he can consistently show the desire. My only concern is his breathing difficulties. ~Nathan


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

HurraKane212 said:


> Outlaw IMO could be a lot like Tyrus Thomas is now if he steps it up defensively. TT is a great athletic defender/ shotblocker/ hustle player. However, his offensive game is still developing. I think TT will be the better player over all, but I think Trout can fit that mold very well. He'd be a perfect Jerome Kersey type player if he can consistently show the desire. My only concern is his breathing difficulties. ~Nathan


Outlaw isn't as solidly built at Thomas, so I don't see him being as big a rebounding force.

I'm hoping Outlaw becomes a poor man's Josh Howard. Seeing him defend Dirk last night game me hope that he'll realize that working on that aspect of his game will guarantee him more minutes.


----------



## blue32 (Jan 13, 2006)

i'm surprised Resume isnt on here making a post about 'offing' webster..... sheesh!


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

mgb said:


> I haven't gave up on TO, but I wish when his shot isn't dropping he'd take the ball to the basket. He doesn't seem to ever do that. I read Nate has confidence in him and tells him to keep shooting, but why doesn't he say take it to the basket more?
> 
> I didn't like how TO came into camp out of shape or the excuse he used. Most like his poor play has to do with him coming in to camp out of shape. Hopefully he will play out of it.


The reason Nate dosen't tell Outlaw to go to the basket more is becouse when he puts the ball on the floor he is out of control. His ball handleing skills suck, Looks like his confidence gets shot after he makes a mistake, He's inconsistant and he gets confused at times. He's a nice guy and I like him but he's not that great.:cheers:


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

Ahaha this thread is hilarious. GO RESUME!!!


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Yep. A lot of short-sightedness demonstrated here.

PBF


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

c_note said:


> Ahaha this thread is hilarious. GO RESUME!!!


LOL yeah I am kicking myself in the ars for this one.
At least I didn't say Brandon Roy sucks and don't draft him like mediocre man lol


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

feel free to bump any thread like this one where I look smart. lord knows there aren't too many to choose from.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

I wasn't in this one, but 'm sure I was bashing him earlier in the year. I used to hate on them, but he, Jack, and Frye have made me believers this season.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

More thread-bumping? You gotta be kidding me.

If the poster wanted to make a point, they could have made a NEW thread that said, "Remember how some of us hated Outlaw? Golly, we sure wrong, weren't we? LOL!"


----------



## Sug (Aug 7, 2006)

As I looked back at what I wrote, I was pretty happy


----------



## ODENIED (Dec 26, 2007)

Travis outlaw is my favorite blazer


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

wastro said:


> More thread-bumping? You gotta be kidding me.
> 
> If the poster wanted to make a point, they could have made a NEW thread that said, "Remember how some of us hated Outlaw? Golly, we sure wrong, weren't we? LOL!"


yeah, thread bumping sucks. don't you know it's the internet and nobody should be held accountable for what they wrote in the ancient history of, say, an hour ago? 

if there's anything we've learned from history it is that it's utterly fruitless to look at it. remember, those who forget the past are commended for repealing it. 

or something like that.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

mook said:


> yeah, thread bumping sucks. don't you know it's the internet and nobody should be held accountable for what they wrote in the ancient history of, say, an hour ago?
> 
> if there's anything we've learned from history it is that it's utterly fruitless to look at it. remember, those who forget the past are commended for repealing it.
> 
> or something like that.


You know what would be more constructive? Create a new thread, with a link to the old thread. That way, people don't come on the board and see an old thread with 90% full of old discussion.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

is it really the end of the world to have to read 90% of old discussion? those of us who remember the thread jump straight to the new posts. those that don't read it all over again and then complain to everyone else that you re-read a bunch of old conversations. 

either way, we all squander a ridiculous amount of time reading stuff that doesn't matter in the real world, which is what message boards like this are for. it's a win-win.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

mook said:


> is it really the end of the world to have to read 90% of old discussion? those of us who remember the thread jump straight to the new posts. those that don't read it all over again and then complain to everyone else that you re-read a bunch of old conversations.
> 
> either way, we all squander a ridiculous amount of time reading stuff that doesn't matter in the real world, which is what message boards like this are for. it's a win-win.


No, it's not the end of the world, but it's a constant annoyance. It's like, "oh look! Something new!" Then I click the thread, and nope, no new discussion. It's a waste of time.


----------

