Mr. Pritchard, if you're reading this

[SodaPopinski]

Please do everything in your power to send Travis Outlaw packing this offseason. I don't care what you get back for him. Any subtraction of Outlaw comes with a net PLUS for this team.

He absolutely FADED and WILTED in what was the biggest series of games for the Blazers in six years.

I'm done with the "freakishly athletic" and "unrealized potential" talk. The guy is one of the most experienced players on the team. He's been here six years, and all he's added to his game is a more realiable perimeter shot, which largely negates his athleticism anyway. He can't finish near the basket on a regular basis. He fades away from, rather than in to, contact, giving the defender the advantage on most occasions. His rebounding averages are atrocious for a player of his size and jumping ability. And he couldn't defend a chair.

Please don't go to Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge to ask them what they think. They are Travis' best friends and will advocate for him staying until the cows come home. They'll put their friendship with him above what's best for the team. I love their loyalty, but sometimes you have to make a decision that upsets a few guys for the betterment of the team.

-Pop

 

[BIG Q]

I think that with Roy and Aldridge now having tasted the playoffs, and failing, will accept what ever KP thinks is best for the team.

 

[SodaPopinski]

I think that with Roy and Aldridge now having tasted the playoffs, and failing, will accept what ever KP thinks is best for the team.

I hope you're right, but I remember reading a comment from Brandon from earlier in the series where he basically said that fans should have patience with Outlaw because he's only going to get better.

Bullshit. I don't want to waste Brandon's and LaMarcus' prime years hoping that a six-year veteran will finally realize his potential in year 7, 8, 9 or 10.

-Pop

 

[Wizard Mentor]

Quit dogging on (playoff clutch) Cliff Robinson, err, Travis Outlaw. Travis really needs to change his mindset regarding contact. LMA is not soft, but TO is.

 

[blazerboy30]

I don't understand this.

You say you don't care what you get back for him? So, what if we got absolutely not back for him? Who would have played in his spot during this playoff series? Batum? Please. Frye? Gross. Ruffin?

LA can't play all game, every game.

 

[maxiep]

Travis Outlaw would have gotten us--along with RLEC--that third option that was missing from the Blazers this series. I hope Brandon Roy is happy; he fucked himself with his loyalty to TrOut.

 

[Pinwheel1]

You need to fill 15 roster spots. You don't need to get rid of Travis. He is a great utility guy to come off the bench. He will accept what ever role you give him. (More so than most guys) Yes we need to improve the team. But you don't get rid of players for a bad playoff series. I have seen super stars have bad series. Nate will play whoever helps most. If you get someone better than Travis, then Travis slips down on the depth chart. We always need depth and Travis can supply that.

 

[Minstrel]

Bullshit. I don't want to waste Brandon's and LaMarcus' prime years hoping that a six-year veteran will finally realize his potential in year 7, 8, 9 or 10.

This doesn't make sense. Portland isn't relying on Outlaw for their future championship hopes. He's a reserve. His presence on the roster in no way hurts the team, as a reserve. No team in the NBA has 12 guys better than Outlaw.

 

[SodaPopinski]

You say you don't care what you get back for him? So, what if we got absolutely not back for him? Who would have played in his spot during this playoff series?

Assuming full health for next season, Martell.

Obviously, I'd expect us to get something for Travis, but at this point I just want him gone.

-Pop

 

[alex42083]

I don't mind keeping Travis around, but if he's someone another team covets to land us a good player, I wouldn't hesitate. And I don't think we can rely on him to be our third-best scoring option. He's still a good player, just not the third best player on a team hoping to win a title.

 

[MrJayremmie]

I don't think we have to get rid of Trav, but I don't think he should play as much. He is great value for his contract, but too much of a liability playing over 30mpg. Playing him in the mid-20s would be fine with me as the 7th or 8th man off the bench (depending on the Center's fouls). He is also good off the court. So yeah, I think it is on Nate to not have the team focus and depend on Trav as much, but I think he is a really good bench player and got national recognition as one of the better players off the bench in the NBA. He gets too much hate.

But i'd also trade him if he, with others, nets us a really good player. Whatever is best for the team i'm down with.

 

[illmatic99]

I just tabulated some rudimentary totals.

In games in which Outlaw has played 30+ minutes, we're 13-14 (including 0-2 in the playoffs). So, we're 43-18 in games in which he has played fewer than 30 minutes. These numbers tell me that he's good, but only if used in moderation.

Maybe having Marty and Batum take some of his minutes will alleviate this issue.

 

[SodaPopinski]

Six-year veteran Travis Outlaw's numbers for the biggest set of six games in his life:

31.8% FG
25% 3pt
66% FT
9 ppg
3 rpg
0.5 apg

-Pop

 

[Minstrel]

I just tabulated some rudimentary totals.

In games in which Outlaw has played 30+ minutes, we're 13-14 (including 0-2 in the playoffs). So, we're 43-18 in games in which he has played fewer than 30 minutes. These numbers tell me that he's good, but only if used in moderation.

That's a correlation, but it doesn't tell us about causation. My guess is that the games Outlaw did not play 30+ minutes in were games when other players who could fill his role (primarily Batum and Fernandez) were playing well. The games Outlaw played 30+ were games when neither of those guys were doing much.

Thus, I don't think Outlaw playing 30+ minutes creates losing. I think Outlaw playing 30+ minutes signals that other players on the team aren't playing well. Which would, of course, hurt Portland's chances of winning.

 

[Wheels]

That's a correlation, but it doesn't tell us about causation. My guess is that the games Outlaw did not play 30+ minutes in were games when other players who could fill his role (primarily Batum and Fernandez) were playing well. The games Outlaw played 30+ were games when neither of those guys were doing much.

Thus, I don't think Outlaw playing 30+ minutes creates losing. I think Outlaw playing 30+ minutes signals that other players on the team aren't playing well. Which would, of course, hurt Portland's chances of winning.

While you make good points on the correlation.. at the same time I can kinda agree with CleBlazer (believe it or not) Outlaw makes some good plays on offense sometimes and is a nice spark.. but when he is out there for extended minutes he can really hurt us with his lack of IQ (Basketball or overall)

 

[Minstrel]

While you make good points on the correlation.. at the same time I can kinda agree with CleBlazer (believe it or not) Outlaw makes some good plays on offense sometimes and is a nice spark.. but when he is out there for extended minutes he can really hurt us with his lack of IQ (Basketball or overall)

Well, Outlaw is limited, which is why he's really not a starter. The point is, if no one else is playing well, what do you do? Outlaw is the next best option...after him, you have what...Frye at small forward?

Outlaw should play as much as he's needed (based on how everyone else is playing) and no more. Ideally, that would be something like 20-25 minutes. But if Batum isn't playing well as the other small forward, and Rudy isn't playing well as the team's best reserve perimeter player, then the next move is to up Outlaw's minutes for that game.

 

[Wheels]

Well, Outlaw is limited, which is why he's really not a starter. The point is, if no one else is playing well, what do you do? Outlaw is the next best option...after him, you have what...Frye at small forward?

Outlaw should play as much as he's needed (based on how everyone else is playing) and no more. Ideally, that would be something like 20-25 minutes. But if Batum isn't playing well as the other small forward, and Rudy isn't playing well as the team's best reserve perimeter player, then the next move is to up Outlaw's minutes for that game.

Fair enough. I agree with points you both make.

 

[illmatic99]

That's a correlation, but it doesn't tell us about causation. My guess is that the games Outlaw did not play 30+ minutes in were games when other players who could fill his role (primarily Batum and Fernandez) were playing well. The games Outlaw played 30+ were games when neither of those guys were doing much.

Thus, I don't think Outlaw playing 30+ minutes creates losing. I think Outlaw playing 30+ minutes signals that other players on the team aren't playing well. Which would, of course, hurt Portland's chances of winning.

Hence the "rudimentary..."

While you are absolutely correct about the lack of causation in my claim, there is also some merit to the fact that Nate uses Outlaw as a crutch, much like he did Jack last year, and also Blake to an extent this year. There have been numerous occasions when Travis has been given a longer leash than guys like Rudy, Batum, or even Oden.

Easy solution: get rid of him, and don't give coach the chance to overplay him. It worked with Jack.

 

[garden of oden]

of course he was very disappointing in the playoffs, but i'd rather wait another playoff series or two before shipping him off.

did everyone really expect him to light it up against Houston, in his first ever playoff series? guarded by Battier and Artest for many minutes?

some guys need some real playoff time under their belts before they can really get better.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Six-year veteran Travis Outlaw's numbers for the biggest set of six games in his life:

31.8% FG
25% 3pt
66% FT
9 ppg
3 rpg
0.5 apg

-Pop

This is a stupid argument. One playoff series in his life. Oh OK lets make roster changes based on this.

 

[LittleAlex]

This doesn't make sense. Portland isn't relying on Outlaw for their future championship hopes. He's a reserve. His presence on the roster in no way hurts the team, as a reserve. No team in the NBA has 12 guys better than Outlaw.

Portland runs a ton of plays for Outlaw. They have counted on him this season to be the third scorer and the primary scorer off the bench. So they have relied on him a great deal this season.

During the regular season this helped the Blazers more then hurt them. During the Playoffs he was a absolute disaster. If they do keep him around, they need to rely on him less next year then they did this one.

 

[Minstrel]

Portland runs a ton of plays for Outlaw. They have counted on him this season to be the third scorer and the primary scorer off the bench. So they have relied on him a great deal this season.

They relied on him because their other, future scoring options (Oden, Rudy, Bayless, Batum) were all rookies and not yet ready to be consistent top scoring options.

So, they "relied" on him due to lack of other options. If your remedy is "get more talented," I don't think that qualifies as an actionable plan. Every team would like to get more talented. Portland has several players who could/should move past Outlaw on the scoring option totem pole. If none of them do, then the team will fail due to a lack of talent, not because they chose to rely on Outlaw.

 

[SodaPopinski]

This is a stupid argument. One playoff series in his life. Oh OK lets make roster changes based on this.

Well, if you agree with the premise ... like I do ... that Outlaw is not a clutch performer, then this is factual evidence to back up my argument rather than a small sample set to create it.

-Pop

 

[hasoos]

The reason Travis Outlaw is so hard to figure out is because he is a tweener. You know what the difference is between a tweener and a player who is versatile? A versatile player is good at multiple positions. A tweener can play multiple positions, but is good at none of them. The reason Travis drives people insane with his performances, is because he can only perform well when provided with certain matchups. When provided with those matchups, he is comfortable and produces. In all others, he is uncomfortable and can't get his game going.

 

[SodaPopinski]

The reason Travis Outlaw is so hard to figure out is because he is a tweener. You know what the difference is between a tweener and a player who is versatile? A versatile player is good at multiple positions. A tweener can play multiple positions, but is good at none of them. The reason Travis drives people insane with his performances, is because he can only perform well when provided with certain matchups. When provided with those matchups, he is comfortable and produces. In all others, he is uncomfortable and can't get his game going.

Also note that if you accept this perfectly reasonable argument from hasoos, it also reinforces Outlaw's uselessness in a playoff series, where teams can and will adjust to make him irrelevant.

Now if Travis had some other strength to his game, such as defense or rebounding or distributing, he would still be an asset. But when all you are is a scorer (and an average one at that), and you have to rely on getting favorable matchups, your value in the playoffs drops significantly.

-Pop

 

[retroblazers]

i still don't know if TO is supposed to be a SF or PF. he can't change direction well enough to play/guard SF's, and he's not strong enough to stand up to PF's. he's the classic tweener. although, he brings some mismatches to the opposing defense as well.

for all that athleticism, he rarely shows it in games. he should be a great rebounder and shotblocker with his quickness and jumping, but he just doesn't rebound, it's almost like he chooses not to rebound. and he should be flying up the court on fast breaks, but his inability to dribble the ball stops that from happening as well.

i know they are slightly different players, but i'd love outlaw to play more like tyrus thomas. that dudes the same kinda undersized pf that can fly. only he grabs boards, blocks shots, and takes it strong to the hoop. and he doesn't demand the ball on offense, he just takes what is given to him in the flow of the game.

 

[jwhoops11]

Well, if you agree with the premise ... like I do ... that Outlaw is not a clutch performer, then this is factual evidence to back up my argument rather than a small sample set to create it.

-Pop

I'll preface this by saying I really really like Outlaw, and have enjoyed watching him grow into a respectable player from what he was when drafted. Think his personality is great and believe he's a glue guy in the lockeroom.

All that being said, and looking at some of the stats kicked around in this thread already, it's really time for him to be moved on. I don't want to make him the fall guy, he doesn't deserve that. I will say using my very scientific eye ball test, that when he came into the game late first quarter last night our whole play shifted. As we all know he has a tendency to stop ball movement when he's on the floor and occasionally falls asleep on the defensive end. These are traits after 6 years in the league that don't change. Mentally he's not in tune with the flow of the game. To be successful you need ball movement and Travis is a black hole. You can't take fade away 18 footers on one end and then get beat in man to man defense on the other. You can't allow your teamattes to be hung out to dry when their in a zone, becuase you aren't aware of what defense the team is playing. To many easy drives to the hoop, offensive rebounds becuase he didn't block out, and open threes in the corner becuase he didn't rotate quickly enough on defense.

It really has become time to move him for someone that will gives us a consistant 30 minutes of team ball everynight.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Well, if you agree with the premise ... like I do ... that Outlaw is not a clutch performer, then this is factual evidence to back up my argument rather than a small sample set to create it.

-Pop

No I think the premise that he is not clutch is far from being sound. The guy has hit big shots in clutch situations. I am not saying he is the STARTER we need to be champions. Just that he is a valuable part of the team. And as pat riley said, "It takes 15 guys to win a championship".

 

[SodaPopinski]

I guess we're just going to have to agree that Travis is one of those polarizing players where some fans love him and some fans hate him.

I personally think we can do better at that position, and I think there will be some buyers out there who see that he was fifth in the voting for Sixth-Man-of-the-Year and think he could help them.

I also think that Nate has some strange loyalty to Travis that I don't understand. Other players who have made much more understandable mistakes have been pulled quickly, whereas Travis seemingly had free reign to fuck up consistently and still get 30 minutes a game. Someone else made the point (not sure if it was this thread or not) that Nate had that same attraction to Jarrett Jack last year, and getting rid of him was part of the reason we played so much better this season.

-Pop

 

[Pinwheel1]

Someone else made the point (not sure if it was this thread or not) that Nate had that same attraction to Jarrett Jack last year, and getting rid of him was part of the reason we played so much better this season.
-Pop

I would disagree with that too. We had to get rid of Jack because he would not have been happy with a diminished role. He would have been a distraction. However if he would have accepted his role we would have been just as good if not better. TO on the other hand would be more inclinded to accept the role. Not that he would be happy about it, just that he would eventually come to terms with it. That is not always easy to find.