So KP is planning on picking Blake and Outlaw back up.

[mook]

I agree that Outlaw is decent value. I'm in no hurry to trade him.

However, I don't know that it's "silly" to evaluate him based off of one playoff series. In pro football, players are on the field for only half the game, and they may only get 5 or 6 games to prove their worth before much of their career is decided. So they may only get a couple of hours of total playing time before it's all decided. Why? Because there are so few iterations in pro football. If you really wanted to fairly evaluate every player with a large sample size, you'd be 7 seasons into his career before you could make a judgment.

Similarly, on a first-round-and-out playoff team, the iterations are pretty limited. You can't know for sure that Outlaw is a playoff choker along the lines of Uncle Cliffy. But there are lots of things in the NBA that you can't know for sure until it's too late to matter. So you take your best guess.

Outlaw's stock definitely went down in my eyes (and I suspect among every NBA GM) as a result of the playoff series. Not enough that I want to just dump him, but enough that I don't consider him to be the excellent value he was before the playoffs. He's a decent, maybe good value, but not excellent anymore, at least IMO.

 

[Uther TheGardener]

might be nate love for him tho

hope nate doesnt veto any trade or picks this summer...again

 

[Blaze01]

You know it took Outlaw 5-6 years to show he belonged as an NBA player...So we should at least give him 3? 4? playoff series before we write him off?

right?

right?

 

[mook]

You know it took Outlaw 5-6 years to show he belonged as an NBA player...So we should at least give him 3? 4? playoff series before we write him off?

right?

right?

I've never found that argument terribly compelling. When he was drafted, he could jump really, really high. And that was it.

He's really a third-year player that took six years to get where he is because he was so bad to begin with.

Going forward, will it take him another six years (for a total of twelve seasons) to reach his true potential? Clearly no, as he's probably about 90% there right now.

The last 10% or so, in my mind, is how much of his playoff misery is an aberration (he was, after all, often matched up against two of the very best defenders in the league).

I think he's a playoff choker, but I could be wrong.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

Outlaw had a poor series - no disagreement there.

I would be happy to see him leave, assuming we got value for him, because his overall game isn't great - agreed again.

However, I think it's absolutely unfair to bag on the guy because of the playoffs. It was his first playoffs and he had to play against the one team in the last however many years that had TWO all-NBA defensive wing players.

 

[oldmangrouch]

I have spent roughly 54 1/2 years on this earth. I have lived as a responsible person. If I go out tomorrow and rob a bank, they are not going to let me off the hook based on "small sample size". I will go to prison, and spend the rest of my days with the label "convicted felon" hanging around my neck.

Sorry Travis, but life doesn't give you infinite chances!

 

[hasoos]

Minstrel, I guess my question about where this is going is this: if Outlaw's value is in his scoring off the bench, but he can't be relied upon to do it consistently (and I won't go into Webs, you could ask the same question), is it valuable? He wasn't "inconsistent" during the HOU series: he was consistently bad. Like it or not, he's relied upon by Nate to be the either the #1 or #2 scoring option when he is on the floor...which is around 28 mpg.

You know I have said this many times, and once you realize this truth, you will be able to live with Outlaw and his production. Outlaw is a tweener. The difference between a tweener and a versatile player is that a versatile player is good at more than one position, where a tweener can play multiple positions but none of them at an exceptional level. A tweener is only useful when lined up against a player who they cause a distinct matchup problem, but usually end up suffering from a matchup problem at the defensive end. Such as a skinny SF type taking a PF out to the perimeter (Outlaw). Once you come to terms with that, dealing with Travis sketchy play from game to game, and sometimes even quarter to quarter, is much easier to deal with. It is like closure in a way. Now I just don't expect much out of him, except if the matchup is just right.

 

[Natebishop3]

You know I have said this many times, and once you realize this truth, you will be able to live with Outlaw and his production. Outlaw is a tweener. The difference between a tweener and a versatile player is that a versatile player is good at more than one position, where a tweener can play multiple positions but none of them at an exceptional level. A tweener is only useful when lined up against a player who they cause a distinct matchup problem, but usually end up suffering from a matchup problem at the defensive end. Such as a skinny SF type taking a PF out to the perimeter (Outlaw). Once you come to terms with that, dealing with Travis sketchy play from game to game, and sometimes even quarter to quarter, is much easier to deal with. It is like closure in a way. Now I just don't expect much out of him, except if the matchup is just right.

Except the tweener status doesn't take into account his extremely low basketball IQ.

 

[PapaG]

Yes, if he had failed at the same level as Outlaw. The team is screwed if your best player is a no show in the playoffs.

The Cliff Robinson years are still fresh in my mind.

Lucky for all concerned, Roy showed up.

I would give Outlaw a break if he broke through in even one game. But he didn't. THAT is a bad sign. Even Blake played two good games.

Of the players who got a significant quantity of minutes, only Travis couldn't be bothered to show up for even one freaking game.

Is that something other teams GM's really want? A guy who chokes in the post season? I would guess not.

I'm wondering what Rudy Fernandez did in the playoffs to make him a part of the future. Same with Greg Oden.

 

[PapaG]

Many people were upset that KP didn't land Gerald Wallace. I'm wondering what he's done to prove himself in the playoffs?

What available player would be a guarantee to come of the bench and have a stellar playoff series, regardless of the opponent?

 

[BrianFromWA]

If you don't give rookies a bit more leeway than 6th-year players, then you're perfectly able to ask that question. Personally, I do.

If Greg tosses up another mediocre season while completely healthy and gets ticky-tack fouled out of the playoffs in the 1st round then I'll be wondering right with you. If Rudy shows nothing other than a capability/predilection to shoot open 3's at a 40% clip, then I'll be wondering. Nothing Outlaw did was a surprise, except that he was consistently worse than usual.

 

[Trader Ed]

What if it is because Outlaw is a good value at $4 million?

DING DING DING We have a winner

totally agree with you Minstrel

we might even have a team already who wants him at that now guarenteed price.

 

[PapaG]

If you don't give rookies a bit more leeway than 6th-year players, then you're perfectly able to ask that question. Personally, I do.
If Greg tosses up another mediocre season while completely healthy and gets ticky-tack fouled out of the playoffs in the 1st round then I'll be wondering right with you. If Rudy shows nothing other than a capability/predilection to shoot open 3's at a 40% clip, then I'll be wondering. Nothing Outlaw did was a surprise, except that he was consistently worse than usual.

Rudy was a rookie only by name. He's played in much bigger games in his career than Outlaw played in, yet he struggled tremendously outside of one game of the Houston series. Plus, Rudy is only a year younger than Outlaw. Less than a year, actually.

 

[STOMP]

the same bitch about Travis thread for the 500th time with everyone sticking to their same positions my position hasn't changed either

I'm looking forward to seeing Travis and Blake on the team next year or KP working his magic and improving the club with the upgrade that seems to come with every move he makes. I'd like to see a better defender/rebounder option off the bench at PF then Outlaw, but I like him better backing up both forward spots then any other option they currently have.

My best guess is that he'll be back and in the rotation for 25 MPG or so... can't wait for the next round of this.

STOMP

 

[LittleAlex]

For a reserve, they can. Secondly, since the vast majority of players remain basically the same player in the playoffs as in the regular season, I think that should be the default assumption. One bad series shouldn't determine everything.

Oden had a poor playoff series, do you think Pritchard should be looking to get rid of him?

Oden was a rookie, and he didn't have a bad playoffs. His job was to front Yao, and he did that as well as anyone.

Outlaw is a 6th year vet and didn't do fuck all in the playoffs.

You are right, Outlaw WAS the same player in the playoffs as he was all year. Namely, a one trick pony black hole who is completely useless on the court if his pull up jumper isn't falling. A power forward in a small forwards body. The Blazer with easily the lowest basketball IQ. I guy who should be better, but clearly never will be.

 

[LittleAlex]

Why not?

Giving up on a player due to a few rough games is silly, whether it's regular season or the playoffs.

Portland shouldn't be afraid to move Outlaw, and should always be looking to get a better piece to replace him in the rotation, but they should NOT move him based on a half dozen games.

Ed O.

The playoffs are a different beast, unfortunately, so you really can't compare the regular season and playoffs in that manner. If a guy goes through a 10 game slump during the regular season slog, it isn't all that big a deal. Even if every game is lost, that is only one eighth of all the possible games.

In the playoffs, if a guy has a one game slump that is at best one seventh of all the games in that round.

Portland can not afford, at any price, a player who lays a turd like Outlaw did. While it is all well and good to call him a bench player, that isn't how he is used. He typically finishes games with the starting unit. He is counted on to be the primary scorer on the second unit. A large number of plays are ran for him in the 4th quarter. He is a very large part of Portland's offense.

When they counted on him the playoffs, he failed miserably. Nate will count on him again next year in the playoffs, should Portland make it. Outlaw will fail once again. The team will struggle because of it. Unless a bunch of other guys step up huge, Portland will be out of the first round again.

Since I enjoy it when the team wins, I would rather they use Outlaw's 4 million on a vet who doesn't suck balls when the games really count.

 

[Minstrel]

Oden was a rookie, and he didn't have a bad playoffs. His job was to front Yao, and he did that as well as anyone.

His production was terrible. And who cares if he was a rookie? Your rule seems to be that we don't have time to wait and see how they do in the future, it's time to make decisions once and for all. You said you'd pitch Roy over the side if he had had a bad series, and he's just a third-year player.

You are right, Outlaw WAS the same player in the playoffs as he was all year. Namely, a one trick pony black hole who is completely useless on the court if his pull up jumper isn't falling.

And an extremely useful player if it is. His averages show that he's useful much more than he's not. So we agree, he's still the same decent reserve player he always was. Someone who should definitely be moveable in a smart trade, but not someone who should be ditched for nothing more than $4 million of cap space.

 

[uosean]

I'd just going to point out one thing. The Blazers are going to wait till the absolute last minute to pick up the options for both Blake and Outlaw. They are SUPER valuable assest due to one thing. . . . . . They are NOT guaranteed contracts unless the team picks up their options by JUNE 30th. So if KP trades them to a team during the draft JUNE 25th and the other team wants to dump IMMEDIATE salary (as in not wait one year in the case of other expiring contracts) then it's the other teams choice to pick up their options or not.

KP is in a position of super flexiblity here and he's holding some great cards to play. I'm so glad he's our GM!! That guy is friggin genius!

 

[adrenalize74]

This isnt about $$ at all for me. I have no probs whatsoever keeping Blake, as a matter of fact I REALLY hope we do! He will be a very good vet backup PG for us. However, I REALLY have issues with KPs man-crush on Outlaw. If we are picking up his option so he can be used as trade fodder, then great.....but if its because KP is in love with him, then......

What if it is because Outlaw is a good value at $4 million?

Like I said, its not about the money......he is a good value.....as a bench player that should only be getting 15-20 mins TOPS per game. Outlaw is what he is, everyone by now should know who he is and the type of player he is as well as his strengths and weaknesses. I dont see him (or want him for that matter) as a major component of this team. He is a role player that fills a hole as needed, but he just isnt being used that way. Nate (and/or KP) seem to be trying to make him out to be the #3 or 4 guy on the team and its KILLING us.

He needs to be moved and a legit roll player needs to be brough in that brings what we need from the backup 4......not a weak rebounding, jumpshooting, poor defending PF with a kindergarden BB-IQ.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Like I said, its not about the money......he is a good value.....as a bench player that should only be getting 15-20 mins TOPS per game. Outlaw is what he is, everyone by now should know who he is and the type of player he is as well as his strengths and weaknesses. I dont see him (or want him for that matter) as a major component of this team. He is a role player that fills a hole as needed, but he just isnt being used that way. Nate (and/or KP) seem to be trying to make him out to be the #3 or 4 guy on the team and its KILLING us.

He needs to be moved and a legit roll player needs to be brough in that brings what we need from the backup 4......not a weak rebounding, jumpshooting, poor defending PF with a kindergarden BB-IQ.

I think this is where a lot of fans get messed up. IF Travis only played 15-20 minutes tops like he should everyone would think he was the greatest role player in the history of the franchise. The problem, however, is that Nate plays him a lot more than he deserves to play. This makes everyone lash out at Travis, when really he is doing the best he can. It's not his fault his coach has no fucking clue on how to use his players.

Travis is what he is. A shoot first, poor defense playing, doesn't really do anything else to help you win guy.

 

[crandc]

This discussion is veering into absurdity. In fact it follows the same pattern of bash/love.

To attempt to get back to the subject, KP picking up Blake and Outlaw's options was a no brainer. Unless a player is a major troublemaker/head case, you don't dump him/her until you have a replacement. Some may think Bayless is the point guard of the future but he's sure not there yet. Outlaw and Rudy Fernandez were the two scorers off the bench.

Picking up options means KP has the ability to sign and trade, if a deal looks good, or to keep if he can't get a good deal. I mean, is that so hard to comprehend?

There is a reason KP is paid a lot of money to be the GM and the people who spend the day posting aren't.

 

[e_blazer]

This discussion is veering into absurdity. In fact it follows the same pattern of bash/love.

To attempt to get back to the subject, KP picking up Blake and Outlaw's options was a no brainer. Unless a player is a major troublemaker/head case, you don't dump him/her until you have a replacement. Some may think Bayless is the point guard of the future but he's sure not there yet. Outlaw and Rudy Fernandez were the two scorers off the bench.

Picking up options means KP has the ability to sign and trade, if a deal looks good, or to keep if he can't get a good deal. I mean, is that so hard to comprehend?

There is a reason KP is paid a lot of money to be the GM and the people who spend the day posting aren't.

Had to rep you for that one.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Too bad the rep points are already paid, b/c crandc's post about being a no-brainer was almost completely incorrect--fun sarcastic comment aside.

To attempt to get back to the subject, KP picking up Blake and Outlaw's options was a no brainer.

First, no transaction has been made to the NBA office or posted on the NBA transaction page. There are a couple reasons for this. One, it hasn't happened, reporting/internet rumor/sound bite aside. Why not? Because it isn't a team option. They have a "non-guaranteed contract". That's all. No "team option", no "player option"...they are under contract for next year unless KP (or any other team that owns their contract) cuts them by June 30. That's it. The really freaking cool and useful thing about that is the following: when we cut Miles, we had to pay his salary (adjusted, potentially, for a buyout) and the number stayed on the cap until the completion of the contract. For Blake and Outlaw, you don't. If they are cut by June 30, no cap number, no salary paid for 2009-10, nothing. If KP pulled the "no-brainer" (which he can't--contracts can't be modified to make them guaranteed) and wasted that golden opportunity, he's pretty darn stupid. There's no possible reason whatsoever to do anything about these two (except trade them) before June 30. If he's telling people "we probably won't cut them--they're useful", fine. Nothing about their 2009-10 contract has been decided, and won't until a) they're traded and cut that day or b) July 1 rolls around and they aren't cut yet.

I know much more about the CBA than Canzano or any talk radio host I've heard in Portland or Seattle. I just happen to post on message boards. And if you think KP doesn't realize this, then that's a problem with the reporting.

 

[Ed O]

There is a reason KP is paid a lot of money to be the GM and the people who spend the day posting aren't.

That's a super-lame argument and can be made as a reason to defend any position made by any GM in NBA history.

Are you saying that no GM has ever made an error and/or deserved to be second-guessed?

Ed O.

 

[LittleAlex]

His production was terrible. And who cares if he was a rookie? Your rule seems to be that we don't have time to wait and see how they do in the future, it's time to make decisions once and for all. You said you'd pitch Roy over the side if he had had a bad series, and he's just a third-year player.



And an extremely useful player if it is. His averages show that he's useful much more than he's not. So we agree, he's still the same decent reserve player he always was. Someone who should definitely be moveable in a smart trade, but not someone who should be ditched for nothing more than $4 million of cap space.

Just a third year player? The difference between a rookie and a 3rd year guy should be enormous. I would expect the entire season to be a big shock to a rookie. A 3rd year guy should be used to the regular season.

Oden did play well in one game. That is enough for me to believe there is a light at the end of the tunnel. As I said, only one player who got regular minutes sucked in each and every game.

It's not like I expect the world. Outlaw's regular season numbers would have been awesome.

If you think paying the weakest link on a playoff team 4 million a year is good, fair enough. I think it is an waste of money better spent on a free agent. If the signing was only to trade him away as a throw in for a package deal, then great.

But I already argued elsewhere that I don't believe the team will be making any deals this offseason.

 

[andalusian]

That's a super-lame argument and can be made as a reason to defend any position made by any GM in NBA history.

Are you saying that no GM has ever made an error and/or deserved to be second-guessed?

The way I read it that was not her argument - it was her opinion. I am pretty sure she gave you the argument a line above it...

 

[Minstrel]

Just a third year player? The difference between a rookie and a 3rd year guy should be enormous. I would expect the entire season to be a big shock to a rookie. A 3rd year guy should be used to the regular season.

But we're not talking about the regular season, right?

If you think paying the weakest link on a playoff team 4 million a year is good, fair enough.

He's not the weakest link. This season, he was a better player than Blake, Rodriguez, Bayless and, of course, Frye/Diogu/Ruffin/Randolph. He's been better than Webster every season that Webster has played. Outlaw will never be remotely the worst player on the roster. Do I think $4 million is a good value for a solid reserve who will be about the 7th best player on an extremely talented team? Yes.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Just a third year player? The difference between a rookie and a 3rd year guy should be enormous. I would expect the entire season to be a big shock to a rookie. A 3rd year guy should be used to the regular season.

Oden did play well in one game. That is enough for me to believe there is a light at the end of the tunnel. As I said, only one player who got regular minutes sucked in each and every game.

It's not like I expect the world. Outlaw's regular season numbers would have been awesome.

If you think paying the weakest link on a playoff team 4 million a year is good, fair enough. I think it is an waste of money better spent on a free agent. If the signing was only to trade him away as a throw in for a package deal, then great.

But I already argued elsewhere that I don't believe the team will be making any deals this offseason.

Oden's PER blows Martell's rookie per out of the water. 11.75 his rookie year, 10.02 then 11.97. Greg Oden in his rookie year was 18.13. The league average by the way is 15.00


Outlaw's PER by the way is 15.15. His second lowest since being in the league.

 

[e_blazer]

Too bad the rep points are already paid, b/c crandc's post about being a no-brainer was almost completely incorrect--fun sarcastic comment aside.



First, no transaction has been made to the NBA office or posted on the NBA transaction page. There are a couple reasons for this. One, it hasn't happened, reporting/internet rumor/sound bite aside. Why not? Because it isn't a team option. They have a "non-guaranteed contract". That's all. No "team option", no "player option"...they are under contract for next year unless KP (or any other team that owns their contract) cuts them by June 30. That's it. The really freaking cool and useful thing about that is the following: when we cut Miles, we had to pay his salary (adjusted, potentially, for a buyout) and the number stayed on the cap until the completion of the contract. For Blake and Outlaw, you don't. If they are cut by June 30, no cap number, no salary paid for 2009-10, nothing. If KP pulled the "no-brainer" (which he can't--contracts can't be modified to make them guaranteed) and wasted that golden opportunity, he's pretty darn stupid. There's no possible reason whatsoever to do anything about these two (except trade them) before June 30. If he's telling people "we probably won't cut them--they're useful", fine. Nothing about their 2009-10 contract has been decided, and won't until a) they're traded and cut that day or b) July 1 rolls around and they aren't cut yet.

I know much more about the CBA than Canzano or any talk radio host I've heard in Portland or Seattle. I just happen to post on message boards. And if you think KP doesn't realize this, then that's a problem with the reporting.

Semantics regarding options aside, KP has indicated that the Blazers will retain the rights to Outlaw and Blake rather than cutting them. There are two valid reasons why he would do this: 1) He likes what they contribute to the team and plans to keep one or both of them; or 2) He thinks one or more of them is worth more in a trade for a player he wants than the extra cap space he could gain by letting them go. The Blazers in the KP/Penn era have always had the guys they want to get pegged and have had plans in place to go about getting them. More often than not, they've been successful. My bet is that the same will be true this summer and that when the dust clears we'll see why keeping these guys was a part of that plan.

I'd prefer that the Blazers acquire a better starting PG and a true backup PF. However, since we on this message board aren't privvy to whom the Blazers are targeting and the methods they plan to go about obtaining their objectives, I don't see any reason to get my knickers in a twist simply because of this announcement.

 

[e_blazer]

The way I read it that was not her argument - it was her opinion. I am pretty sure she gave you the argument a line above it...

That's the way I read it, and that's why I repped her for it.