The "SF Problem"

[Boob-No-More]

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.

I agree with everything you wrote. However, I must point out that Martell Webster, the player, is still only 22-years old (and basically missed all of last season with his foot injury). He could still evelove into Martell Webster, the concept (as described above). Martell's problem has never been his shooting mechanics. It's always been his confidence - something I think will improve with age/maturity and playing on a contending team surrounded by other players who are confident in their own abilities.

I was expecting Martell to have a breakout season last year. He came into camp in awesome shape, seemed more aggressive and looked absolutely fantastic in that one preseason game (who didn't?). With the addition of a low post scoring threat in Oden, and James Jones departure, I expected Martell to be our leading 3-point shooter. I know his percentages haven't been great in the past, but they haven't been that bad either - and his 3FG% has increased every year. So, I fully expected him to be our starting SF last season, average 14 - 15 PPG and shoot 0.400 from 3-point range.

Obviously, that didn't happen due to the injury. And, it remains to be seen how well he will recover from the injury and not playing competitive basketball for almost an entire year. So, I admit my expectations are tempered, but I am also not ready to give up on Martell completey. If he plays well, it makes Outlaw even more expendable. If he doesn't, he's young, cheap and easy to move.

BNM

 

[Ed O]

I agree with everything you wrote. However, I must point out that Martell Webster, the player, is still only 22-years old (and basically missed all of last season with his foot injury). He could still evelove into Martell Webster, the concept (as described above). Martell's problem has never been his shooting mechanics. It's always been his confidence - something I think will improve with age/maturity and playing on a contending team surrounded by other players who are confident in their own abilities.

Agreed. His age is a primary reason I still have hope. If he were Outlaw's age? Forgetaboutit.

Ed O.

 

[andalusian]

Martell's problem has never been his shooting mechanics. It's always been his confidence - something I think will improve with age/maturity and playing on a contending team surrounded by other players who are confident in their own abilities.

I am sure that his self confidence was an issue - but I would argue that Martell's biggest problem was his inability to create a shot for himself, handle the ball effectively and move laterally/change directions with the ball.

I honestly have nothing but hope that he will turn to be that great player that his "NBA body" and "Shooting mechanics" lure us to fall in love with - but I have to say that I doubt it very much.

The reason is, to be honest, is that Batum, younger than Webster is - has already shown that "it" factor that can make you look at him and say "Yeah, his offense needs work and he clearly needs to develop strength because some players just over-power him - but, by golly, when he is a bit more experienced he can be a real headache for the opposing team".

Batum is longer, seems just as fast as Webster, his long ball shooting percentage in his rookie year is the same Webster's average and he seems to have more of a handle and much better lateral quickness and ability to change direction.

Nothing will make me happier than a healthy Webster coming in, shooting lights out consistently and playing good defense while giving Batum some real competition at the SF position - I just doubt it will happen.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Agreed. His age is a primary reason I still have hope. If he were Outlaw's age? Forgetaboutit.

Ed O.

Travis had scoring averages of 5/6/10 basically his first years in the league. Martell's are 6/7/11. Not really a big difference at the same age

 

[number 10]

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

That was poorly written. By "starter minutes," I meant 30 or more, something like what Blake got. Unless his offense really improves, I don't see him making that big a jump next season. Consequently, his backup will have a bigger role than a typical backup has. I'm not very confident that either Webster or Outlaw can fill that gap well.

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.

Fair enough. We will have a very deep squad, our backup guards should be amongst the best in the league. That does make me more confident about a rusty Webster as a backup 3. I also forgot to mention Rudy, who will no doubt get some minutes as a 3.

 

[Ed O]

Travis had scoring averages of 5/6/10 basically his first years in the league. Martell's are 6/7/11. Not really a big difference at the same age

I don't know what years you're pulling, but Outlaw played about a third as much as Webster did in his first three seasons in terms of minutes and Webster played more minutes a game in 07-08 that Outlaw did, in spite of Outlaw being two years older.

Outlaw seemingly has plateaued. I don't think that Webster has, and I would expect a couple of years of improvement before he does so.

Ed O.

 

[Minstrel]

Webster's age is a point in his favour to some extent...he's still pre-prime. But his very poor rate of improvement chills the enthusiasm over his age, to me. The ages of 23-26 (the ostensible start of a player's prime) tend to yield lesser gains than ages 18-21. Considering Webster's lack of improvement over those years (not counting, of course, last year's lost season), I'm unconvinced that he has quite a bit of improvement ahead of him.

Sergio Rodriguez is in a similar boat to me. He's still young...but his inability to improve over key formative years undermines the value of that.

The ages of Webster and Rodriguez make improvement at least possible without a pure miracle (a player who is already 26 or older has nearly no chance of jumping to a completely new level of performance), but their development paths don't suggest that major improvement is likely.

 

[Minstrel]

That was poorly written. By "starter minutes," I meant 30 or more, something like what Blake got. Unless his offense really improves, I don't see him making that big a jump next season. Consequently, his backup will have a bigger role than a typical backup has. I'm not very confident that either Webster or Outlaw can fill that gap well.

Ah. Well, I'm not sure if he will get 30+ minutes, but I wouldn't be adverse to giving him such minutes. He's not productive on offense, but he's efficient. He moves the ball well, makes good decisions and knocks down open shots. On offense, he's definitely a minor role-player so far, but not one that inhibits the offense. In that sense, he's somewhat equivalent to Blake, who has received "starter minutes." The real difference is that Batum is a true asset on defense. Combining an efficient (even if not difference making) offensive game with a strong defensive game is sufficient (in the lack of better options) for true starter minutes.

On top of that, I do expect Batum's offensive game to improve, due to skill improvement, experience and added confidence. With how he played last year and expected gains on offense and defense, I'd feel comfortable penciling Batum in for 30 minutes a game. I don't expect him to be an impact player in 2009-10, but a solid starter (a 30+ minute player who doesn't hurt you).

 

[hasoos]

There is something to be said for players who show up and show that they are ready to play organized basketball. Those first few years, Travis did not show that. Webster showed more, but was still limited. Even Batum had to be limited as to what he could and could not do. That is why when I saw Dante Cunningham in summer league, I was a bit excited. He knows how to play organized basketball. He knows how to play defense. He has some basketball IQ.

 

[Eastoff]

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).

I think this is pretty accurate for time for all 3 players. I believe McMillan has said that the starting position is Batum's to lose.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

There is something to be said for players who show up and show that they are ready to play organized basketball. Those first few years, Travis did not show that. Webster showed more, but was still limited. Even Batum had to be limited as to what he could and could not do. That is why when I saw Dante Cunningham in summer league, I was a bit excited. He knows how to play organized basketball. He knows how to play defense. He has some basketball IQ.

If he sticks around, he could be a great find, definitely. If he's also okay with being a backup 3/4, he could clean up on minutes, as well (if we ship Travis and Martell off for some reason).

 

[STOMP]

We will have a very deep squad, our backup guards should be amongst the best in the league. That does make me more confident about a rusty Webster as a backup 3. I also forgot to mention Rudy, who will no doubt get some minutes as a 3.

Size wise, Rudy is more of a 2-1 then a 2-3. Compared to Roy, he's shorter, much lighter, and has less length. I'd guess the times that Roy and Rudy are on the court together it will be teamed with Blake or Miller more times then not and it will be Brandon covering the other team's 3... of course that guy will likely be more 2 guard sized himself.

STOMP

 

[axs88]

David Thorpe once said somewhere that he is more worried about guys with a nice looking shot that don't shoot a good percentage, than someone who does OK with a less than perfect technique... that made me wondering about Webster.

 

[mook]

We will have a very deep squad, our backup guards should be amongst the best in the league.

Not a bad point, really. Is there a better backup guard rotation than Blake, Fernandez and Bayless? You could argue we've got the best backup center in the league, too.

With Miller, Roy, Batum, Aldridge, Oden, Przybilla, Blake, Fernandez and Outlaw, we're going to have one rock-solid 9 man rotation this year.

I'm stoked.

 

[STOMP]

But he put up 24 points (!!!!) in one quarter (!!!!) against the Jazz!!!! Oh yeah, he also scored (OMG) 15 points (!!!!) against the defense of the Kings (gasp), and it was in a meaningless pre-season game!!!! Ain't that something?!?! He's our answer at SF. Fo' sho!

sorry but you're giving him too much credit In the Kings "game" they were missing their two best players (Miller & Martin).

STOMP

 

[LameR]

But he put up 24 points (!!!!) in one quarter (!!!!) against the Jazz!!!! Oh yeah, he also scored (OMG) 15 points (!!!!) against the defense of the Kings (gasp), and it was in a meaningless pre-season game!!!! Ain't that something?!?! He's our answer at SF. Fo' sho!

But wait... there's more. He also has a beautiful release on his jump shot (even if he's never even been an average shooter).

I don't think Webster is anything special, but saying he hasn't been an average shooter is a little rough. Being 37% from 3 for his career when more than half of his shots have come from there isn't below average in my mind. He is a shooter. That's all he is. But it's not like he's been a bad shooter. Streaky at times for sure, but I'd say average.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Until I see with my own two eyes that Martell is back and healthy and until Travis shows that he's as effective at the 3 as he is at the 4 (check out 82games.com if you don't believe me) I don't think the position is a problem at all. Of course this isn't to say it couldn't become a problem, but if so that's why trades are allowed in the NBA

 

[Cake]

Nicolas Batum is head and shoulders above Martell Webster. In Webster's best season (his 3rd in the NBA) he produced 3.3 wins in 2100 minutes. Batum produced 3.5 wins in 1400 minutes in his rookie season. Oh...and Batum was a year younger. Batum had better start and with Webster getting mop-up minutes at best. Maybe Webster can succeed as a Kyle Korver type, spreading the court by hitting threes. (Though Webster is only marginally better than Batum at three point shooting, if that.) Batum's overall fg% was much higher than Webster's career best too. And Batum is a better passer and rebounder. Obviously he's a better defender. Batum could score, if he were given that role, but as a starter, his role is to defer to the other scorers in the starting lineup. I think he's perfect for the starting role and about 30 minutes per game this season.

If Webster is starting this season, I'll be pretty annoyed.

 

[craigehlo]

It's a consistency problem, not a SF problem. The frustrating part is that it should be one of the easier positions to fill with a talented starter, but we have yet to do so. We tried with Hedo and Odom but struck out. I just hope they can get something done at the deadline this year.

 

[Eastoff]

... In Webster's best season (his 3rd in the NBA) he produced 3.3 wins in 2100 minutes. Batum produced 3.5 wins in 1400 minutes in his rookie season. ...

what sdoes this mean, as in, where did you get these seemingly arbitrary numbers?

 

[oldmangrouch]

Webster has shown he can do one thing at an NBA level - shoot wide open treys....and that was on 2 good feet.

If Webster is even playing, and I will believe it when I see it, he had better not be playing more than garbage minutes. For all his flaws, Outlaw is still a better offensive player, and neither is good enough on "D" to make a difference.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

what sdoes this mean, as in, where did you get these seemingly arbitrary numbers?

It's win shares, an advanced stat that estimates the number of wins per season a player produces for a team.

 

[STOMP]

what sdoes this mean, as in, where did you get these seemingly arbitrary numbers?

you can find listings of advanced stats like win shared on a number of sites including basketball-reference.com. Navigate to an individual player (like Batum ) and then scroll down to the advanced stats section. Hover your cursor over the various category for a brief explanation of the stat. Hope that helps

STOMP