|
posted By mike, 4 November 2008 11:09:57 PM
I thought you knew better Wendell! Rudy is a SG not a SF like Batum. Always get as good laugh at you writers here at Hoopsworld. You all are clueless in NBA news, always making something up to get notice, writers are bunch of jokes that writes like grade schools kids. Oh, would help if you all get your facts right too!
posted By Dear Mike, 4 November 2008 11:36:13 PM
Actually, you're the one who's clueless. Wendell has followed the Blazers for a long time, and if you were actually a Blazers fan, you would know what's been going on. The Blazers have been considering, ever since Martell went down, either starting Outlaw or putting Rudy at SG and sliding Roy to SF. It wasn't until Batum showed himself in preseason that his hat was thrown into the argument. Nate decided against Rudy bc he was worried that we'd be giving up our size advantage and we would be worse for it on defense. Outlaw has a low BBALL IQ, has only 1 move, and plays no defense. He doesn't fit into the offense and there aren't enough touches to go around on the first unit. Because of these factors and Batums ability to be a factor without the ball in his hands, Batum won the starting job.
Wendell was only pointing out that Fernandez has already proven his mettle and that Batum starting in front of him is amazing for a rookie.
posted By wmaxey, 5 November 2008 12:42:10 AM
i wish i had more to add....."dear mike" handled his business (much thanks). i'm thinking nicolas will do the same.
posted By Don, 5 November 2008 12:49:04 AM
Sometimes it's not what we say as much as it is the way we say things...
I think both of you are right. Rudy IS NOT a small forward. He could potentially play that position, but the concerns are that he would tend to get posted up and overpowered quite a bit. Nate was considering trying him at that position, but his concerns won out.
If Don Nelson was the Blazer's coach, Rudy would be starting. But with McMillan placing such an emphasis on defense, that's just not going to happen.
There's no question in my mind that Rudy is the better player right now. But he is not built to be a small forward and would be too much of a liability on defense. That's why we're looking at Batum instead of Rudy at that position.
posted By wmaxey, 5 November 2008 1:58:00 AM
i hear you don....allow me to clarify (as I did above): if and when nate decides to start rudy, it will be at shooting guard. brandon would move to the three. nate's tried that rotation a few times and said he would explore that option this season, but for now this was a defensive move in favor of nicolas. considering portland's struggles on defense,it's the right move....
posted By smith, 5 November 2008 4:26:33 AM
It's also not out of the realm of possibility to see Rudy eventually start at the point and we just run a 2 (S)guard back court. Batum is the real deal and I think a lot of GM's are going to be kicking themselves for passing on that kid. When the season started last season, all the mock drafts had him really high, and he just started to free fall for whatever reason. Too bad, so sad, go Blazers. Now if we could only get rid of Diogu and maybe Outlaw... Tayshaun Prince or Shawn Marion anybody?
posted By wmaxey, 5 November 2008 11:29:00 AM
thanks for the line smith....always appreciate your takes. just curious: do you really want portland to deal travis outlaw? if so, what do you want in return? and please don't say mike conley jr. and is your vote swayed at all by what travis was able to do off the bench last year or basically about another slow start this year? here's another batum comparison i've heard tossed around: andrei kirilenko. hit me back....
posted By smith, 5 November 2008 12:51:04 PM
I think that if Portland wants to get the optimum bang for their buck with the player most valuable that they're willing to trade, they should strike while the iron is hot with Outlaw. I personally love the guy, I think he's great in the locker room and on the court (in the right offense). I'm still convinced however that Webster will be better in time than Outlaw and Batum will be the starter long term. Outlaw too often looks out of sync with the offense if he's playing the 3. He's a player that needs to have the ball in order to be effective. If he's playing the 4, he's extremely productive because of his ability to distance himself from his man. I kind of saw the writing on the wall last year with Outlaw that his game was developing into something that was going to want to be the "big fish." Now with Rudy and Batum, I think Outlaw is rather expendable in terms of value vs. team needs. He's also developed a bad habit of not passing the ball frequently enough. He tends to try to do too much offensively. All that said, this isn't in any way shape or form a slight on his ability. If he stays on the team, that's fine too as we certainly wouldn't have ended the season so well last year had he not been there. I do think that Outlaw can be a productive starter when he can be the 1st or 2nd option for a team that's in need of scoring, but that won't be in Portland and I don't think he'll be content coming off the bench forever. As far as who we should target...for the contract and winners mentality this year...I'd say Shawn Marion, but that creates problems in the depth chart at the 3. Tayshaun Prince would be a dream come true as he has no ego and would be able to mold Batum into a viable up and comer in this league. Gerald Wallace and Hedo Turkoglu would also fit well I think, but we'd still have to do some work to trim the roster in the process. Right now the PG position does need some fine tuning. I like Steve Blake a lot, but I'm not sure we couldn't do a little better with Kirk Hinrich. Conley is a project and while it may help Oden with his mood as of late, I don't think Conley is the right fit. The dream PG for this team would have been Billups. Not only could he have led this team to the playoffs this year, there's another young PG on the roster very much in the Billups mold in Jerryd Bayless. It would have been a perfect fit, but we'd obviously had to have given up too much to pull it off. Did I hit all the points? lol
posted By ARGH!, 5 November 2008 1:01:29 PM
maxey: going to respond to your questions to smith because I feel like it,
I do want portland to deal travis, but I really have no idea what I want in return, either a PG or a backup PF unless we plan on keeping Frye
with pryz/frye we've got very little post play coming off the bench, don't know I don't really see us going with seperate starting/bench units past this season though
assuming that martell comes back healthy, and batum keeps playing at this level, I just can't see us keeping a backup SF who doesn't mesh well with our starting unit,
haven't really been enamored with the roy/rudy back court, that'll take some time for them to adapt to one another I believe, I don't like rudy playing point, its a defensive liability, and rudy is best playing off of the ball where he is free to move, and play off space, with the ball channeling thru him... back to rudy/roy I think that because roy doesn't move his defender around a whole lot, it makes it a bit hard for rudy to play off the space, and so he kinda just camps out on the 3 point line also seems like rudy likes to come off screens where roy likes to stand with his dribble, also rudy likes to help out off his man, interested to see if this affects how batum looks because with both those guys out there you don't know where the help is coming from but you can be pretty sure its coming. It'll be interesting to see how Nate juggles the backup PF minutes, think Nate last game had Travis at starting 3, then switching to backup 4, since channing has been playing backup 5...
posted By wmaxey, 5 November 2008 1:18:31 PM
good stuff smith....i want faithful - and even casual -readers to be able to spit their game here. especially when the banter is productive. you touched on some interesting points. that conley rumor doesn't fly. there would have to be more involved to get a good return. but let's give outlaw's adjustment back to the bench a little time - say a month - before we "strike" while the iron is hot".
posted By wmaxey, 5 November 2008 1:24:48 PM
hey arghi....thanks for chiming in on this one. i think we for sure have to consider channing and martell and how they play a role in what outlaw's future looks like in portland. with oden out, channing has a chance to stake his claim with some more playing time at both the 4 and 5. and regardless if anyone wants to admit it or not, the depth chart will change drastically at sf when martell is healed. it will be very interesting to see how the roles of nicolas and travis fall into place....it's clear though that the situation at pf and pg are still a concern to the masses.
posted By levon, 5 November 2008 1:46:49 PM
damn mike u got served lol
posted By smith, 5 November 2008 3:53:28 PM
I don't disagree with you at all Wendell, in fact I think if a deal is made, it should be made after Dec. 15 so we can throw Shavlik Randolph into the mix...lol. In all seriousness however, you're absolutely right in that there will be a shake up at the 3 when Martell comes back, but don't forget he can also play the 2. This is certainly going to be an interesting year. Do we have an over/under on how many games Przybilla should start ahead of Oden until the big fella is at 100%? I'd like to say maybe around 20 more games, then Oden takes over. Take it easy Maxey! Keep up the good work.
posted By wmaxey, 5 November 2008 4:33:07 PM
honestly, i'm all for bringing oden off the bench. in my mind joel should be starting regardless. let greg earn it. let him earn it by staying healthy. let him earn it by playing well. let him get hungry for it instead of handing him the keys to the car and expecting him to drive the team.
|