Seriously consider. Start Dante Cunningham.

[B-Roy]

I see zero similarities, mainly because Cunningham is a PF, and because I've not heard reports of Cunningham surprising everybody at camp as I heard about Batum last season.

I heard Greg Oden dominated camp last year...and we know how that turned out.

I don't know why you're basing your opinion off reports coming out of camp.

 

[PapaG]

I heard Greg Oden dominated camp last year...and we know how that turned out.

I don't know why you're basing your opinion off reports coming out of camp.

I'm basing my opinion on Dante Cunningham not being a SF and Webster being available (and a better player), but whatever.

If people think he should start, so be it. I disagree. I'll just point out that this thread was created by a poster named "Dante_Cunningham".

 

[B-Roy]

I'm basing my opinion on Dante Cunningham not being a SF, but whatever.

If people think he should start, so be it. I disagree.

I disagree too, but I disagree with your reasons for disagreeing.

 

[PapaG]

I disagree too, but I disagree with your reasons for disagreeing.

Batum played meaningful minutes last year in the preseason. Cunningham did not.

Frankly, it's such a silly idea to me, I haven't gone into depth on why I disagree other than to throw out a few reasons why.

 

[oldmangrouch]

I'm no big fan of Webster, but let's give him a few starts to see how he does.

 

[Natebishop3]

Batum played meaningful minutes last year in the preseason. Cunningham did not.

Frankly, it's such a silly idea to me, I haven't gone into depth on why I disagree other than to throw out a few reasons why.

You could throw out playoff experience.... You love that one.

Or maybe you could throw out chemistry.... I haven't heard of DC and Roy having long talks outside of the PF.

How good would it be if our star shooting guard and our starting small forward had no relationship away from the court?

 

[MickZagger]

I'm not a big fan of Webster. Way too inconsistent and he seems to lack bball IQ. I guess the same could be said of Outlaw too though. So I guess I'd go with the lesser of two worlds.

I'd like to see a lot of Roy and Rudy together.

 

[BenDavis503]

I'll just point out that this thread was created by a poster named "Dante_Cunningham".

Well my name used to be Batum_Kaboom...

 

[oldguy]

Nic didn't need the ball to be effective. That worked, because he wasn't going to get the ball much, as we have consistent efficient scorers.

I don't see DC offsetting Nic's defense by playing better on offense, because with the big 3, he's not going to be getting enough touches.

 

[PapaG]

You could throw out playoff experience.... You love that one.

Or maybe you could throw out chemistry.... I haven't heard of DC and Roy having long talks outside of the PF.

How good would it be if our star shooting guard and our starting small forward had no relationship away from the court?

This is petty, Nate. You really posted this?

Wait, of course you did, since you apparently don't care if the Blazers implode this year just so you can say that Nate isn't the reason for their success.

Weirdo.

 

[PapaG]

Well my name used to be Batum_Kaboom...

Among many other things.

You should just change it to Next_Big_Thing and call it a day.

 

[Blazer_Hippie]

This is exactly what I was thinking. Do people not remember last year starting Batum after he sucked it up in summer league and preseason? How did that turn out? I'm not saying start him either, but for the people saying its delusional or thinking its ridiculous, think about last year.

I said it was delusional to think DC is, at this point, a better player than Batum... which I believe. Unproven potential is like an irresistible lure for some folks.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Where and when did people start getting the idea that Cunningham has the speed to defend the 3 spot? Don't get me wrong I think he's got some potential to be a decent backup 4 (eventually) in the league as a Joe Smith type (maybe), but to take Batum's spot he'd need to be a lot quicker laterally and his range would need to extend beyond the fifteen to eighteen feet he currently hits from.

I think it's far more likely we'll see Webster, Travis, and Roy log minutes at the three spot until Nic is able to return to the lineup.

 

[jlprk]

Plus, this is a totally different situation. Webster went down, and with no experienced small forward to take his place, Nate went with Batum (outlaw was playing the 4). In this case, Batum goes down, but we have a perfectly good replacement in Martell Webster waiting in the wings. At the very most, I could see Cunningham getting some time at the backup. That's it. Nate would be an idiot to start Cunningham over Webster.

Every post in this thread, except the above, is about who's better, Webster or Cunningham. Only that post discusses the situation--that last year, the starter would have been Outlaw, and this year, it would be Webster. McMillan prefers to bring in Outlaw off the bench (same thing now with Miller vs. Blake). That's the only reason Batum started last year--it wasn't because he was the best SF at the start of the season.

 

[maxiep]

"I seriously considered it, and then decided to go with Webster."

--Nate McMillan