The "SF Problem"

[Sug]

I guess when people say we have a SF problem I don't see it. We have at least three players that can be productive there. During the 2007-2008 season we have Martell Webster as our starter for 70 of the 82 games and were able to post a 41-41 record. This past season we Batum starting in 76 of the 82 games and posted a 54-28 record. I think it is safe to say that Batum will be the same or better in the 2009-2010 season, and that any contribution from Webster would be a plus. Add in the ability of Outlaw to play the 3 and I feel like we have three decent or better SFs. They are all athletic, can shoot the ball at an above avg percent, shoot FTs above 70%, and all shoot the 3pt above 35%. Each has shown that they can rebound a little as well. They all also average under 1 TO per game. They also don't commit silly fouls.

None of them are going to be all-stars, but none of them are going to kill you either. They have decent contracts, and they come to play every game. There are better players, but at the same time one of our best prospects is Batum and the kid is only 20. I guess I don't see this position as a problem, nor do I see it as a strength. It is covered and decent for the next several years. We already have our superstar in Brandon, a top 10 PF in LMA. Our PG slots are now well balanced, and the center position is in good hands with Joel and Oden.

This might be a homer take, but I actually like all three of our SFs for different reasons. Batum is a motor guy, Martell can become a deadly shooter, and Outlaw is just fun to watch.

To me Batum is the guy with the most potential because he is only 20 and has the instincts of a vet. I hope he continues to develop and becomes a Kersey like figure in Blazer history.

Thoughts?

 

[VanillaGorilla]

I basically agree with everything you said. I have not thought of the SF position as a problem at all.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

In truth, we only have an SF problem for two years max -- Batum is proving in international play this summer that he's improving at a clip that's good. In 2011-2012, he'll be our starter, and will be a great 3rd or 4th option on offense. For now, we can continue to use the three-headed monster at SF, so long as chemistry doesn't suffer too badly. If Outlaw's willing to be a backup for life, all the better; he's no worse than Ruben Patterson, and just fine to come off the bench.

In reality, I think our biggest weakness is backup PF if Pendergraph doesn't pan out, and that's not a huge deal either if Joel doesn't mind playing backup PF a little. I am a homer, but I say bake it one more year.

 

[Reep]

The main small forward problem I see is that there aren't enough minutes at SF for all of them. Even if you bring Outlaw in as backup PF, if Webster comes back, someone is going to be left out.

 

[Minstrel]

I think small forward is a short-term "neutral" position (neither a strength nor a weakness) and a long-term strength...as Batum gets older and better. I think Batum has a star ceiling and a championship-caliber role-player floor. So, my median expectation for him is that he'll be a very good player and a nice complementary piece to Roy/Aldridge/Oden.

 

[blue32]

Yeah, I think this season if Trav is still around his minutes are mostly going to be from playing the 4, when Aldridge is resting.

Webs and Batum are going to be battling and it's going to make them both get better... I think we've seen what Outlaw can do, so there isn't much more I expect from him...

 

[BlazerCaravan]

The main small forward problem I see is that there aren't enough minutes at SF for all of them. Even if you bring Outlaw in as backup PF, if Webster comes back, someone is going to be left out.

Batum might start in front of Webby, but he won't get more than 24 minutes yet. I see a 24/24 split between Batum and Webster, and 12-14 minutes for Outlaw (plus any extra minutes at SF if Martell reinjures or Batum gets tired).

 

[Idog1976]

I was with you until I saw the Outlaw pic. I would rather have Martell out there with a boot on.

 

[Idog1976]

In 2011-2012, he'll be our starter, and will be a great 3rd or 4th option on offense.

If Batum is ever our 3rd option then you can just start betting on Kobe or LBJ to win it all every year. If Oden isn't our 3rd option by 2011/12 we will never win a banner.

P.S. I love Batum but scoring should be a situational thing at best and certainly not seen as a top 3 or even 4 option on this team. I want Oden and our PG whomever that is in 2011/12 to be our 3rd and 4th option Batum should be option 5.

 

[Idog1976]

I think small forward is a short-term "neutral" position (neither a strength nor a weakness) and a long-term strength...as Batum gets older and better. I think Batum has a star ceiling and a championship-caliber role-player floor. So, my median expectation for him is that he'll be a very good player and a nice complementary piece to Roy/Aldridge/Oden.

This ^. Nailed as usual Ministrel.

 

[Ed O]

If the team were hell-bent on winning the title in the next two years? I think an upgrade at the SF spot would be required. Because I think that the timeline is a bit longer than that, I expect the team to be just fine.

Similar to what Minstrel posted: I don't see us getting HURT at the small forward spot, and in the long run it could evolve into a strength.

Ed O.

 

[Reep]

Batum might start in front of Webby, but he won't get more than 24 minutes yet. I see a 24/24 split between Batum and Webster, and 12-14 minutes for Outlaw (plus any extra minutes at SF if Martell reinjures or Batum gets tired).

There is really no way to predict this now. What if Martell takes a year to get back in shape (like G.O.)? What if Batum's experiences this summer give him an offensive game to go with the defense and ball movement? I think Batum will see a minimum of 20/game, but if he develops, I could easily see him getting closer to 30--especially if Webster doesn't come back strong.

OTOH, if Webster comes back lights out with stellar defense, then Batum may be second unit. I'd put my money on Batum though.

 

[Tince]

There is really no way to predict this now. What if Martell takes a year to get back in shape (like G.O.)? What if Batum's experiences this summer give him an offensive game to go with the defense and ball movement? I think Batum will see a minimum of 20/game, but if he develops, I could easily see him getting closer to 30--especially if Webster doesn't come back strong.

OTOH, if Webster comes back lights out with stellar defense, then Batum may be second unit. I'd put my money on Batum though.

I agree with everything except for Outlaw getting 12-14 minutes at PF. The only way that happens is if GO or Joel gets hurt (which is possible). With everyone healthy, those two take all the center minutes and there is no way LMA plays 36mpg or less (IMO).

 

[Mediocre Man]

The "problem" as I see it, is that they are all average. They all do things that are a little better than the others, with no one beoing outstanding at anything.....at least right now. Webster is a slightly better 3pt shooter, but not FG shooter. Outlaw can create his shot better than the other two, and Batum is a better defender and passer than either, but again, not by a huge margain right now.

 

[tlongII]

We can win the title with the players we have now. I have no doubt about that. Backup PF is our biggest need.

 

[Mediocre Man]

There is really no way to predict this now. What if Martell takes a year to get back in shape (like G.O.)? What if Batum's experiences this summer give him an offensive game to go with the defense and ball movement? I think Batum will see a minimum of 20/game, but if he develops, I could easily see him getting closer to 30--especially if Webster doesn't come back strong.

OTOH, if Webster comes back lights out with stellar defense, then Batum may be second unit. I'd put my money on Batum though.

When has Webster been lights with stellar defense to come back like that?

 

[alex42083]

I want to see Martell out there and healthy. Nicolas is good, but his lack of offense just became a little bit of a liability during the playoffs. When he was hitting his shots, though, we were practically unstoppable with the threats we have. Hopefully he improved a bit more on that end especially for the SF position.
Travis' best position is still back-up PF where he can take advantage of his quickness against opposing team's backups.

 

[LameR]

If Martell is healthy then I really don't want to see Outlaw at SF ever. Not saying Martell is an amazing player (he has apparently grown in lore since getting injured for some), but I like the way he plays a lot more than Outlaw. I think he's a better fit.

I'm an Outlaw hater though. I'd kind of just prefer he doesn't play at all on the nights where he's playing like crap, but we'll probably stick with him until the 4th when he for some reason remembers how to play basketball.

 

[Idog1976]

If Martell is healthy then I really don't want to see Outlaw at SF ever. Not saying Martell is an amazing player (he has apparently grown in lore since getting injured for some), but I like the way he plays a lot more than Outlaw. I think he's a better fit.

I'm an Outlaw hater though. I'd kind of just prefer he doesn't play at all on the nights where he's playing like crap, but we'll probably stick with him until the 4th when he for some reason remembers how to play basketball.

lol. Yep, yep and yep.

 

[Natebishop3]

I feel like Outlaw is the odd man out, and I personally think his mental lapses hurt the team. The problem is, we aren't sure if Webster is actually going to be healthy this upcoming season, so we need Outlaw as insurance.

 

[hasoos]

Every year we have had 3 players or so who "Could" be productive there. There is a big difference between actually being productive, and having the possibility of being productive. I acknowledge that maybe a SF might have a breakthrough year. But I am not going to hold my breath over it, because that has been the case for about the last half of a decade.

 

[andalusian]

We do not have a problem at SF - especially when you realize that we have a SG that will get more minutes in Rudy - which will necessitate playing Roy some minutes at SF - and Roy is very good in this position as well. Think small-guards have a problem containing Roy with the ball in his hand creating? It's just as big a problem or bigger for small-forwards.

The only thing I do not get is this love-fest for Webster who has, so far in his career, been a below-average player year after year. I doubt Webster will see many minutes and will probably be trade-bait - with Batum, Roy/Rudy and some spot minutes from Travis at the 3 - Webster will see the floor only if he got a Steve Austin treatment on his leg.

 

[STOMP]

The only thing I do not get is this love-fest for Webster who has, so far in his career, been a below-average player year after year. I doubt Webster will see many minutes and will probably be trade-bait - with Batum, Roy/Rudy and some spot minutes from Travis at the 3 - Webster will see the floor only if he got a Steve Austin treatment on his leg.

The love he gets from some here is very odd... it's like these posters all heavily invested in his rookie cards and jersey. He has absolutely been a below average on both ends of the court despite having ample opportunity to shine.

Unless he improves dramatically over what we've seen before (the Steve Austin line is spot on), I expect him to be played under 10 MPG. To my eyes there is a clear hierarchy of their options... Batum, Travis, Webster. Batum is already the top talent and would presumably have the most room to improve. Travis is not only better at most every statistical measure compared to MW, he's also a better fit with the reserves as he gives that unit someone who can go when the clock is winding down.

But bottom lining it, much like the OP I don't see a problem at SF

STOMP

 

[mook]

I really wanted Artest at the beginning of the summer.

I really hated the idea of Turkoglu.

Somewhere right in the middle of those two options I had "just leave SF alone and see what Batum does."

That's where we are, and I'm ok with that. I always felt a much greater sense of urgency about getting a better starter at PG than Blake. Thankfully Pritchard did that.

 

[hasoos]

I guess my main thing is that the offense can not afford to have as many offensive holes as we had last year, because when you face a good defensive team, the more weapons on the floor, the better chance of being able to beat that pressure.

Last year with Joel and a non scoring SF on the floor was too easy for teams to cover, allowing them to double down on our major threats at will.

Miller will throw a wrench into it this year, becaues he won't just stand out at the 3 point line as a decoy. But it will work much better if either the SF or the center starts pulling their weight in the scoring column.

 

[alex42083]

The only thing I do not get is this love-fest for Webster who has, so far in his career, been a below-average player year after year. I doubt Webster will see many minutes and will probably be trade-bait - with Batum, Roy/Rudy and some spot minutes from Travis at the 3 - Webster will see the floor only if he got a Steve Austin treatment on his leg.

No one's saying the guy is a superstar in waiting. I know it's been argued ad nauseum of his PER or whatever, but the guy isn't a total scrub.
He's an unknown at this point and we haven't gotten to see him play with Rudy and Oden, and an improved LA and Roy yet.
Obviously the Blazers saw enough to offer him a four-year extension just last summer. I'd like to see what he's got and if he can make an impact after this pretty bad injury before totally discrediting the guy just a few years removed from HS.

 

[Minstrel]

The love he gets from some here is very odd

I understand it, even though I don't share it. Webster has the "aura" of a shooter with athleticism. As an archetype, that seems to fit very well with big men like Oden and Aldridge and slashers who can pass like Roy, Miller and, later, Bayless. In terms of the platonic ideals of basketball, it "feels right" to have an athletic lights-out shooter on the wing to complement slashers and an inside presence.

Of course, the problem is that he's not really a "lights-out" shooter and what athleticism he possesses he's never been able to translate into NBA production. Martell Webster the concept is nice. Martell Webster the player is not very good. The difference between concept and execution.

 

[number 10]

I still think that we have a big SF problem, namely that we have Batum and no one else. Webster is a huge wildcard; even when he was healthy, he was below average. After a year off, what can we expect from him? I think it would be very optimistic to expect him to even be at the same level he was at pre-injury (and no, one pre-season game against a crappy Kings team doesn't count).

Outlaw is much better as a PF. At the 3, he's average to below average (a PER of 14 with poor defense). He pretty much can't start at the 3 on this team, limiting him to a role off the bench.

For me, the position is a big weakness. We have a solid starter (Batum) who probably won't deserve starter minutes next season, a player who is much better at another position, and a guy who hasn't played for a year and was never that hot in the first place.

 

[Minstrel]

For me, the position is a big weakness. We have a solid starter (Batum) who probably won't deserve starter minutes next season

I'm not sure I understand this statement. If Batum is a "sold starter," why will he probably not deserve starter minutes next season?

 

[BlazerCaravan]

For me, the position is a big weakness. We have a solid starter (Batum) who probably won't deserve starter minutes next season, a player who is much better at another position, and a guy who hasn't played for a year and was never that hot in the first place.

I don't disagree, but (to split hairs) the reason I don't see this as a problem is that we have good or very good or great players at the other 4 positions in the starting lineup (making Batum Option 5 out of 5), all capable of playing 3/4 of a game or more. Even if Outlaw's in at the 3, he'll never be Option 1 (he was at the beginning of last season before Nate got better at rotating Roy and Aldridge out separately), or even Option 2. Option 1 will be Roy or LMA (always one is in the game), and Option 2 is Rudy. Option 3 is Outlaw or Blake or Bayless. I see this as an okay situation, if not great.

However, in two years (2011-2012) IF Batum can deliver on adding to his game, this becomes less of a problem, because Batum will start getting 36 minutes a game and you can run a scrub in there behind him. The only reason it's a problem now is because none of them own the starter's minutes yet.