# Should the Celtics re-sign Walker?



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

Do we bring back Antoine?


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

Absofreakinlutely not.


----------



## lempbizkit (Dec 25, 2003)

Danny needs to evaluate whether there is a reason the immediate post trade Antoine turned into the Rick Pitino era Antoine by the playoffs, and if there isn't he needs to go.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

If the price is right, then yes we need to. 

I'm at a point where I want to say "Give Al the starting minutes and let Antoine walk," but I just don't believe that he's anywhere close to ready. If something goes wrong it can kill the kids confidence.

You can't count on a 20 year old to take you to "The Holy Grail."

I think Al and Perk can benefit from Antoine a lot, not to mention where we'll be with all the young guys having another year under their belt, 3/4 draft picks and some minor offseason moves. 

Give this team a whole year under their belts and you're better by 100% than you were this year.


----------



## banner17 (Jun 28, 2003)

Yes, I think you do, but for no more than 6/7 million. maybe 3 years 21 mil

Antoine lost a lot of money this post season whether it be from us or another team looking to sign him. 

I think if you give the current squad (minus gary) another full season playing together and we'll be right there with anyone in the east that doesn't have Shaq playing for them.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Between the MLE or 7.5M.

Either resign Antoine or trade Pierce. It's as simple as that.


----------



## celtsb34 (Apr 22, 2005)

No way he is getting payed the most on the team and he is over ratedwww.nba.com/celtics/stats


----------



## ZWW (Jan 17, 2004)

Yes, if the price is right and he accepts a lesser role. No, if he wants top dollar and won't be a team player.


----------



## Bsktbllplayr25 (Feb 10, 2005)

yes, because without him we wouldn't have even made the playoffs or won the atlantic


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

I disagree with that. We wouldn't have won the Atlantic, but we would have made the playoffs.

But that is not the point. What about next year and beyond is the question.


----------



## Bsktbllplayr25 (Feb 10, 2005)

i think antoine can play a big role in this team in the future because he is a leader and at least to me makes this team "click" and is the perfect piece to make the puzzle complete.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

> ​ Will this be bitter end for Walker?
> ​





> *By Amalie Benjamin, Globe Staff | May 8, 2005*
> 
> Antoine Walker's face scrunched into a ragged ball as he took a seat on the bench. Only seconds had passed since he had, once again, turned a personal foul into a technical foul. And, he knew, it might be his last game as a Celtic.
> 
> ...


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

> <table background="http://news.bostonherald.com/siteImages/sports_bg.gif" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td background="http://news.bostonherald.com/siteImages/sports_bg.gif" width="100%"></td></tr> <tr><td align="center" bgcolor="#cccccc" height="2" width="100%"><spacer type="block" height="2" width="1"></td></tr> </tbody></table>
> Walker wants to stay put​
> By *Mark Murphy*
> Sunday, May 8, 2005 - Updated: 10:49 AM EST
> ...


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

yes they should re-sign walker...and you have to give him more than 6 or 7 million i mean for gods sake blount has a 6 year 40 million dollar contract...and walker is definetly worth more than blount...jefferson is a great offensive player but he still is a defensive liability with the man he is guarding...yes he is good at coming from the weak side to block shots but he still is not good one on one...give the kid some time he is 20 years old...let walker be a mentor for him for a couple of year b4 you throw him into the fire...plus its pierces tiem to shine at this point in his career...the celts have a window of maybe 3 years b4 pierce starts gettin old so lets try to win now and by the time pierce is getting older our young guns will be ready to handle a much bigger role


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

I agree with Premier, either we re-sign Walker or we trade Peirce, it IS that simple...if we don't sign Walker then we rebuild completely, that will upset Celtics fans everywhere but that is the choice that has to be made.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

I said yes because you either resign him or trade Pierce and I don't think Danny is dealing Pierce, though I desperately want him to.


----------



## Bsktbllplayr25 (Feb 10, 2005)

what do you think we could get for pierce that could be any better?


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Bsktbllplayr25 said:


> what do you think we could get for pierce that could be any better?



nothing...we will probably get a halfway decent player with an expiring contract...nick van exel comes to mind...if the celtics make a trade like that i will never watch them again...they have a very good team in place and dont need to make any major moves...give them a full year together...add this years first round draft pick...and we'll go much farther than the first round next year


----------



## Bsktbllplayr25 (Feb 10, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> nothing...we will probably get a halfway decent player with an expiring contract...nick van exel comes to mind...if the celtics make a trade like that i will never watch them again...they have a very good team in place and dont need to make any major moves...give them a full year together...add this years first round draft pick...and we'll go much farther than the first round next year


i totally agree with everything you said, and i hope the don't break this team up, we should have gone much farther than we did next year, and i can't wait to see what levels this team goes to next season.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

The object is not to go "further than the first round." The object is to win a championship.

Yes, Walker is a better player than Blount. Yes, he is more valuable to a team than Blount. But his market value ain't much more than what Blount is getting paid.

As far as Walker goes, Danny may try to sign him for 2-3 years at 6-7 million per. If he was willing to sign for 2 years, maybe they could give him 8 million per. If he wants more, its bon voyage.


----------



## tdk1984 (May 9, 2005)

He needs to be brought back. The C's struggled until that deal to bring him back. Then they played much better after his return. Coincidence? Maybe, but I sincerely doubt it.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

This isn't that hard of a decision when you consider Jefferson is waiting in the wings.

Antoine has the heart of a Celtic, but the talent of a Hawk. My guess is that the minority rules in this poll.


----------



## MacDanny 6 (Jun 7, 2002)

I never liked Antoine Walker. He doesn't seem like he could help a team win. All he does is chuck up 3's and sometimes his shooting could be 3-for-25 at times. And all he cares about are his stats. Remember when the Celtics traded him to the Mavs. He was finally on a great winning team and he was talking about how Danny Ainge was trying to ruin his career by sending him to the Mavs. Then when he went to the Hawks and his numbers increased, he was talking about how he wanted to re-sign with them, even though they had the league's worst record.


----------



## PilgrimPride (May 9, 2005)

Signing Walker is like the movie Back to the Future. The last time I looked at the future its a forward direction. Speaking of forward direction if Walker is resigned how about moving him to SF, Al Jeffferson PF, PP at the 2, Banks for now at the PG, and oh Mark Blount in the middle unless Perkins step up to his potential.

PF needs to be played in the paint first not an outside offense first.

Greetings from the Rising Sun - Colin in Japan :clap:


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

Franco 5 said:


> I never liked Antoine Walker. He doesn't seem like he could help a team win. All he does is chuck up 3's and sometimes his shooting could be 3-for-25 at times. And all he cares about are his stats. Remember when the Celtics traded him to the Mavs. He was finally on a great winning team and he was talking about how Danny Ainge was trying to ruin his career by sending him to the Mavs. Then when he went to the Hawks and his numbers increased, he was talking about how he wanted to re-sign with them, even though they had the league's worst record.


this post is WRONG.

all he does is chuck up 3's? this was true during the o'brien era, when o'brien ENCOURAGED him to shoot the 3's. he only shot 3 three's a game during his stint with boston this year.

all he cares about is stats? i may be wrong but i seem to believe antoine walker enjoys winning. he is also a great character guy, everyone in the organization loves him as a person.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

PilgrimPride said:


> Signing Walker is like the movie Back to the Future. The last time I looked at the future its a forward direction. Speaking of forward direction if Walker is resigned how about moving him to SF, Al Jeffferson PF, PP at the 2, Banks for now at the PG, and oh Mark Blount in the middle unless Perkins step up to his potential.
> 
> PF needs to be played in the paint first not an outside offense first.
> 
> Greetings from the Rising Sun - Colin in Japan :clap:


the strength of walker's offensive game is his versatility. he's not an exceptional post player nor is he great on the perimeter. but he is decent at each of them and combined that makes him a decent player.

although i agree with your point...it's kinda ridiculous that our starting SG is our best low post player. i'd rather have a more conventional 4 like AJ.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

according to a reliable source, the celtics are going to try to sign and trade toine. possibilities include toine to NY for tim thomas or toine and blount to NY for penny hardaway. or toine to houston for weatherspoon and wesley.

if they keep him they are supposedly going to try and do it short term with 3 yrs @ $24 mil or 2 years @ $18 mil with a team option for a 3rd year


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Franco 5 said:


> I never liked Antoine Walker. He doesn't seem like he could help a team win. All he does is chuck up 3's and sometimes his shooting could be 3-for-25 at times. And all he cares about are his stats. Remember when the Celtics traded him to the Mavs. He was finally on a great winning team and he was talking about how Danny Ainge was trying to ruin his career by sending him to the Mavs. Then when he went to the Hawks and his numbers increased, he was talking about how he wanted to re-sign with them, even though they had the league's worst record.


Speaking of stats, did you see how many less shots he took when he came back to Boston, how many less points he had? Yet after the season ended you didn't hear Antoine complain about how "Danny is trying to ruin his career again" but rather how much he would love to be back here.

The guy loves to play and he was forced to play on a team with 2 other all-star power forwards.


----------



## vandyke (Jan 8, 2004)

Delontes Herpes said:


> according to a reliable source, the celtics are going to try to sign and trade toine. possibilities include toine to NY for tim thomas or toine and blount to NY for penny hardaway. or toine to houston for weatherspoon and wesley.
> 
> if they keep him they are supposedly going to try and do it short term with 3 yrs @ $24 mil or 2 years @ $18 mil with a team option for a 3rd year



Source??? By the way cool name


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

i don't want to give out any names because it was posted in a private message board. if it had been posted in public i would even post a link, but since it's not i think it would be indecent to name the source.

and i'm glad you enjoy my name :biggrin:


----------



## kamego (Dec 29, 2003)

I am sure he wasn't traded for to let go. The price is the main point, if not I would expect a sign and trade.


----------



## FatMike58 (May 11, 2005)

Antoine=Doody


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

Please - no.

I personally am d.o.n.e with Walker. And I don't care about the money. They can sign him for 5 bucks and I don't want him. True Celtic? What does that mean? His game - whatever there was of it - is going south fast. He shoots WAY too much. Not only that but he has possibly the worst shot in the NBA. Partly because he can not jump - he flicks it up not trying to get it in - but in the hopes of not getting blocked. And it gets bloked on him A LOT. The guy can't make a layup. He can barely dunk and is 6'10. He cries to the refs too much. He kills fast breaks and momentum.

In short - he blows. Please let him be gone.


----------



## FatMike58 (May 11, 2005)

agreed


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> Please - no.
> 
> I personally am d.o.n.e with Walker. And I don't care about the money. They can sign him for 5 bucks and I don't want him. True Celtic? What does that mean? His game - whatever there was of it - is going south fast. He shoots WAY too much. Not only that but he has possibly the worst shot in the NBA. Partly because he can not jump - he flicks it up not trying to get it in - but in the hopes of not getting blocked. And it gets bloked on him A LOT. The guy can't make a layup. He can barely dunk and is 6'10. He cries to the refs too much. He kills fast breaks and momentum.
> 
> In short - he blows. Please let him be gone.



and yet if it wasnt for him we probably wouldnt have made the playoffs...and we definitely wouldnt have won game 6...good assesment


----------



## FatMike58 (May 11, 2005)

he definetly did help us make the playoffs yet in a way he did drag the team down in the playoffs with his shot selection, and if he really want to stay a celtic offer him like 6 million a year and see if he does then


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

FatMike58 said:


> he definetly did help us make the playoffs yet in a way he did drag the team down in the playoffs with his shot selection, and if he really want to stay a celtic offer him like 6 million a year and see if he does then



dont u think he deserves a little more than what mark blount is making?


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

yes he does...say all you want that mark blount is overpaid but there were 3 other teams willing to give him the full MLE.

antoine walker is worth more than the MLE.

i'm just confused how such a terrible player has averaged 20 points 9 rebounds and 4 assists in his career. you would think that one would have to be good to put up those numbers...one would think.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Delontes Herpes said:


> i'm just confused how such a terrible player has averaged 20 points 9 rebounds and 4 assists in his career. you would think that one would have to be good to put up those numbers...one would think.



lol that is so true :cheers:


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> True Celtic? What does that mean?


you might wanna check up on ur celtics history because if you did you might know what a true celtic is...


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

I have been a Celtics fan for many many years. In fact in many ways I am a "true Celtic". Does that mean they should give me $10 million a year? No. We don't need cheerleaders - we need players.

Yes after the Walker trade the Celtics made a nice run that helped lock up the Atlantic. However his knucklehead play probably cost us the playoffs. The game Walker was out we won by about 30 on the road. He comes back and we lose by about 30 at home. 

Last season without Walker we lose in the first round.
This season with Walker we lose in the first round.

Walker is over-rated and his numbers are inflated. He might get points - but it takes him over 20 shots to get those points. And *MANY* of his rebounds are off his own crappy missed layups. Layups! The guy can't make them. If you are such a big fan did you see Walkers fast break wide open layup MISS? Nice. 

And how many times does he get his shot bloked? Too many.

He's crap. I don't want him on the Celtics for ANY amount of money. Adios - please.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Causeway said:


> I have been a Celtics fan for many many years. In fact in many ways I am a "true Celtic". Does that mean they should give me $10 million a year? No. We don't need cheerleaders - we need players.


He is a player, maybe I'm wrong but he's wearing number 8 on the court and giving it 110% every game. He's one of the rare guys that will go dive to the floor for a ball...who's not a roll player.



> Yes after the Walker trade the Celtics made a nice run that helped lock up the Atlantic. However his knucklehead play probably cost us the playoffs. The game Walker was out we won by about 30 on the road. He comes back and we lose by about 30 at home.


Game 6, Pierce gets thrown out, Toine puts the team on his back and forces a game 7. And yes, you can definitely blame Toine for a 30 point loss in a game where he was clearly our best player.



> Last season without Walker we lose in the first round.
> This season with Walker we lose in the first round.


Last season we lost in the first round? No we didn't, we got killed in the first round, then we got put in a US mail box on the way home. Last season's display was pathetic. Comparing it with this years is saying that Apples and Oran---err Metal are the same.



> Walker is over-rated and his numbers are inflated. He might get points - but it takes him over 20 shots to get those points. And *MANY* of his rebounds are off his own crappy missed layups. Layups! The guy can't make them. If you are such a big fan did you see Walkers fast break wide open layup MISS? Nice.


Of course he's overrated. When we don't win he's overrated, when we do win everyone is supposed to praise Pierce. And his rebounds don't come off his own missed layups. Many of his rebounds come off of the defensive end and on misses from other players. Sure he does get his own misses sometimes, but is it a crime? Don't other players do it also? Maybe we should just tell him to not get those rebounds...



> He's crap. I don't want him on the Celtics for ANY amount of money. Adios - please.


Winning is crap, the fun is in the lottery. It's too bad that you don't want him, but fact is the majority of the people at the FleetCenter/Garden do.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

Hey guys. New here, but I post regularly over at the InsideHoops.com messageboards.

On the topic of Antoine Walker - the guy helped us get into the playoffs, so it's fair to him that we don't have a knee-jerk reaction to his poor playoff showing, so I'm going to go about this in a fair way.

Firstly, in case you guys didn't notice this year, Paul Pierce had issues being the leader of this team. He didn't respond well to the pressures of the Boston media and was clearly unhappy throughout the first part of the season. What Walker brings is a guy that can take a lot of that pressure and burden of being the top scorer, rebounder, and team captain off of Pierce, and Paul seemed much happier on the court upon 'Toine's return. Secondly, though he made great strides this year, Al Jefferson is not ready to be a starting PF in this league. He racks up too many fouls (often unnessecary ones) and has flashes of defense, but is overall a poor defender. Bringing him off the bench for 20 minutes or so per game is something I'd rather see. If Blount can return to his form of 10/7 and be a legit defensive presence (this is a HUGE if) we can move him back to starting C and start LaFrentz at power forward, and bring Al off the bench. He also is a big help on the boards, a place we struggled mightily this year.

Now, the other side. Antoine Walker showed in this series that he was incapable of being part of the team's overall strategy. He disrupted our offense with dumb turnovers, holding the ball too long, and forcing shots. Bottom line is Walker is a chucker, a very inefficient scorer (in sharp contrast with PP, who was top 10 in the L in points per shot this year). He doesn't seem to "get it" and realize what he has to do to help the team. He toned down his 3PT attempts but I'd rather see less than 3 per game. He's not a very good shooter, and anybody who shoots 55% from the line should realize that. He's a decent post player but his athleticism (or lack thereof) really hurts him. On defense, he looks positively overwhelmed by good offensive PF's (note, Raef did what I thought was a very good job defensively in this series, especially when matched up against O'Neal). Walker is a volume scorer- that is, he needs lots of shots to get his points. I don't know if it's that he didn't buy into the overall scheme, but he should be smart enough to realize that what he did this series was anything BUT help the team. #1AWF, you make note of 'Toine's Game 6 performance (which was huge, undoubtedly), but what about those other games? We were downright better on both ends of the court with Antoine not in the game. 

Walker's a talented player. I just don't want to see him back. I've had enough of his pathetic shot selection, his putting up too many shots (he should NOT be out-shooting Paul Pierce in a playoff game!), and just Walker in general. I don't care if we have to have some growing pains over the next few years; unless Walker has a drastic change in attitude (which isn't forseeable...he's stayed the same, even the second time through), he won't help this team in a whole lot of ways besides being a "lightning rod" for criticism. Let's get somebody who makes $1M to do that, not a $7M guy.

Sorry to branch off here (I'm ranting, I know), but it pisses me off to see the Boston media and a lot of Boston fans blaming PP for the playoff loss. You want a goat? How about Walker (who was under 40% for most of the series), how about Davis (who didn't show up for half the games)...not the guy who shot over 50%, led the series in scoring and rebounding, and carried his team through Game 2 (just about won it for us) and Game 4. Pierce is not blameless. But nor is he the goat he's being made out as.


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

I still say no. If you're going to give the MLE to someone, go after Dan Gadzuric. Get Gadzuric, put him at the 5, move LaFrentz to the 4. LaFrentz only plays what, like 25-30 minutes per game. That games Big Al the opportunity to play significant minutes, in the 20-25 minute range per game. To hell with Walker.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Lanteri said:


> I still say no. If you're going to give the MLE to someone, go after Dan Gadzuric. Get Gadzuric, put him at the 5, move LaFrentz to the 4. LaFrentz only plays what, like 25-30 minutes per game. That games Big Al the opportunity to play significant minutes, in the 20-25 minute range per game. To hell with Walker.


We have bird rights for Antoine. We don't have to give the MLE to him as we can sign him to a contract that won't affect our cap number for next season. Lanteri, do you honestly think that Dan Gadzuric, Raef LaFrentz, or Al Jefferson is _more_ productive than Antoine Walker?


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

Premier said:


> We have bird rights for Antoine. We don't have to give the MLE to him as we can sign him to a contract that won't affect our cap number for next season. Lanteri, do you honestly think that Dan Gadzuric, Raef LaFrentz, or Al Jefferson is _more_ productive than Antoine Walker?


I'm not concerned with production. I'm concerned with the ability to give us a presence in the post. Antoine did not give us that ability outside of a few games when he first came back. Gadzuric and big Al can provide that post presence. LaFrentz can be our big man that strays on the perimeter, because unlike Walker, LaFrentz actually has some consistency in shooting the outside shot and doesn't take bad shots. Given a couple years their production could easily match that of Walker's. Plus Gadzuric is an excellent offensive rebounder, which is invaluable.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

In my opinion (and I'm sure others share the following sentiments), Antoine Walker currently is a better post player than Al Jefferson (and certainly is better than Gadzuric). Jefferson may have a lot of post moves, but when coaches put a double-team on him, he turns into Bruno Sundov. Walker, when he plays there, is a very good post player. He uses his body to position himself in a way that will get him an easy path to the basket (or alteast get an offensive rebound). The problem with Antoine is that he was groomed to be an hybrid power-forward by Jim O'Brien and Rick Pitino (ever since his Kentucky days). His three-point shot isn't good enough to excuse himself of venturing out on the perimeter for most offensive possessions. 

By the way, Antoine is a _much_ better offensive rebounder than either Gadzuric or Jefferson.


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

Premier said:


> By the way, Antoine is a _much_ better offensive rebounder than either Gadzuric or Jefferson.


Antoine isn't even close to Gadzuric.

Walker= 38 minutes per game and 2.3 offensive rebounds 
Gadzuric= 22 minutes per game and 3.2 offensive rebounds. 

In fact Gadzuric was #1 in the league in offensive rebounds per 48 minutes (7.0) 
#9 in the NBA in offensive rebounds PER GAME, and he only played 22 minutes per game. 

Gadzuric had a total of 261 offensive rebounds in 1,783 minutes played. 
Walker had a total of 182 offensive rebounds in 2,955 minutes played. 

Walker played nearly twice as many minutes as Gadzuric and had 80 less offensive rebounds. 

How can you tell me that Walker is the better offensive rebounder?

Next time look before you speak.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Lanteri, who else rebounds on the Bucks?

The Celtics averaged 11.1 offensive rebounds per game. _Six _Celtics' players averaged atleast one offensive rebound per game (Kendrick Perkins had .9 offensive rebounds per game). This means that the offensive rebounds weren't concentrated to one or two players rather than almost half the roster. In order for the Tony Allen's to get their putback dunks, the weakside defenders need to be tied up. Guess who was drawing all the defenders while boxing out for rebounds? 

For the Milwaukee Bucks, Joe Smith was doing this leaving Gadzuric with the opportunity to get easy offensive rebounds. Zaza Paulichia was able to get 1.8 offensive rebounds in less minutes than Gadzuric. He's still a good offensive rebouner, but his stats get inflated by Milwaukee's system. In my opinion, Antoine is a better offensive rebounder just because of his technique in boxing out and tying up defenders allowing other players to get the rebounds.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

I agree with Premier for the most part, except I wouldn't say 'Toine is the better offensive rebounder...I know Gadzuric got so many boards because the bucks suck, but he got significantly more than 'Toine and I'll give him the edge.

However, he is no more of a low post presence than 'Toine is, doesn't have even close to as good of gross offensive game, and can't pass or dribble like 'Toine can. I asked an intelligent Bucks fan about him and he said that he can't really play much defense and he doesn't think he'll ever be much better than a low level starter.

Gadzuric is a downgrade from 'Toine.


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

Delontes Herpes said:


> I agree with Premier for the most part, except I wouldn't say 'Toine is the better offensive rebounder...I know Gadzuric got so many boards because the bucks suck, but he got significantly more than 'Toine and I'll give him the edge.
> 
> However, he is no more of a low post presence than 'Toine is, doesn't have even close to as good of gross offensive game, and can't pass or dribble like 'Toine can. I asked an intelligent Bucks fan about him and he said that he can't really play much defense and he doesn't think he'll ever be much better than a low level starter.
> 
> Gadzuric is a downgrade from 'Toine.


That's the thing. Scoring isn't really a priority right now out of a guy like Gadzuric. We need someone that will hit the offensive boards with some consistency. We have Pierce, LaFrentz, Ricky, Marcus, Delonte, Raef, and Big Al and even TA that are out there to score for us. We should be considered with the boards. Gadzuric has an okay game in the post, nothing special, but he did seem to have a thing for lighting the Celtics up. He may be a downgrade...offensively from Walker, but it's hard to argue with the rebounding numbers.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

He had amazing rebounding numbers. But what you have to consider is

A) they won't be that good on a better team, such as the celtics
B) he is good for nothing else
C) to acquire him, we will have to give him a longterm contract at at least MLE money. I don't think he's the longterm answer, hence I wouldn't give him a longterm deal. Also you always have to be wary of the contract year guy (See: Mark Blount).


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

Also, if he is that good, you would figure that he would be able to muster more than 22 minutes a game on a 30 win team...


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Like I think Lanteri or Premier said, if you let go of Walker, get rid of Pierce. Pierce and Walker are like Francis and Mobley, you seperate them, and one of them goes down. After Walker was traded, Pierce's impact on the game went down. Is it a coincidence that these past 2 season that Walker has been gone, Pierce might not have changed stat-wise, but attitude and impact-wise? I'm not saying that Walker is great, I'm just saying, without Walker, Pierce might get 20/4/4, but with Walker he is much more productive.

Personally, I think the C's should just start Jefferson, let Walker walk, and kinda partially rebuild until either a good deal for PP comes along or his contract expires.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

Blazer Freak said:


> Like I think Lanteri or Premier said, if you let go of Walker, get rid of Pierce. Pierce and Walker are like Francis and Mobley, you seperate them, and one of them goes down. After Walker was traded, Pierce's impact on the game went down. Is it a coincidence that these past 2 season that Walker has been gone, Pierce might not have changed stat-wise, but attitude and impact-wise? I'm not saying that Walker is great, I'm just saying, without Walker, Pierce might get 20/4/4, but with Walker he is much more productive.
> 
> Personally, I think the C's should just start Jefferson, let Walker walk, and kinda partially rebuild until either a good deal for PP comes along or his contract expires.


first of all, pierce will get 21/6/4 sans 'toine.

second, have you considered that the celtics are just better as a team with toine taking minutes from googs, perkins, and blount?


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> and kinda partially rebuild until either a good deal for PP comes along or his contract expires.


So you're content to waste Paul Pierce's prime rebuilding? When is another player of Pierce's caliber gonna come along? 


> toine taking minutes from googs, perkins, and blount?


Tom Gugliotta hasn't been on the Celtics since the trade deadline.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

my point was before the trade, googs, perk were getting backup minutes and blount was getting starter minutes.

after the trade, antoine took away all of googs minutes, most of perk's minutes, and a decent portion of blount's minutes as he was demoted to a backup.

and that's the main reason why the team was better after the trade...not because walker made pierce happy since they're best buds 4eva


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

by the way...i decided my stance on walker.

if we can get expiring contracts and a 1st rounder (or a future 1st rounder)...do it.

if not, we should try to keep him for 3 years at $25-30 mill.

if we lose him without getting back a player and trade blount...we're going to be short on big man minutes with not much resources to fill them.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> not because walker made pierce happy since they're best buds 4eva


If you're insinuating that that's what I meant, you're incorrect. What Walker did do was take some of the media pressures and strain off Pierce.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

Ah, sorry for the misunderstanding.

Yes toine does do that but i don't think it has a serious effect on pierce's on court performance


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

> He is a player, maybe I'm wrong but he's wearing number 8 on the court and giving it 110% every game. He's one of the rare guys that will go dive to the floor for a ball...who's not a roll player.


In my book giving it all means doing what it takes to win. Walker does not get that. If he did he'd be a great asset to any team. But he does not get his stregnths. He needs to shoot WAY less. He needs to keep his *** under the boards. And needs to get to the line once in a while. And he needs to cry much less to the refs. 


> Game 6, Pierce gets thrown out, Toine puts the team on his back and forces a game 7. And yes, you can definitely blame Toine for a 30 point loss in a game where he was clearly our best player.


Yes Walker was nice in OT in game 6. But again if not for his crap play in regulation there would have been no need for heroics in OT. Walker in game 6 went 11 for 26. *11 for 26*! That's heroic??? In addition he had ZERO free throw attempts on 26 shots. Is that even possible. You can not get to the line ONCE on 26 shots? That is amazing. With the way Walker shoots he should not be shooting nearly 26 shots.


> It's too bad that you don't want him, but fact is the majority of the people at the FleetCenter/Garden do.


It looks like a lot of people in this thread want him back. Fine. I post in another borad called scout.com. The Celtics board there strongly does not want Walker back. And if you watched any of the games you would have heard the boooos raining down on Walker at the Fleet and heard Doc talk about those boos. I'd saythe majority of the people at the FleetCenter/Garden don't want Walker back in *Celtic Green*.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Causeway said:


> In my book giving it all means doing what it takes to win. Walker does not get that. If he did he'd be a great asset to any team. But he does not get his stregnths. He needs to shoot WAY less. He needs to keep his *** under the boards. And needs to get to the line once in a while. And he needs to cry much less to the refs.
> 
> Yes Walker was nice in OT in game 6. But again if not for his crap play in regulation there would have been no need for heroics in OT. Walker in game 6 went 11 for 26. *11 for 26*! That's heroic??? In addition he had ZERO free throw attempts on 26 shots. Is that even possible. You can not get to the line ONCE on 26 shots? That is amazing. With the way Walker shoots he should not be shooting nearly 26 shots.


You blame Toine for not being able to buy a foul against him? 22 shots were probably from inside the Arc in that game, and on 22 shots he does not get one call for him? What do you expect him to do?



> It looks like a lot of people in this thread want him back. Fine. I post in another borad called scout.com. The Celtics board there strongly does not want Walker back. And if you watched any of the games you would have heard the boooos raining down on Walker at the Fleet and heard Doc talk about those boos. I'd saythe majority of the people at the FleetCenter/Garden don't want Walker back in *Celtic Green*.


The Fleet has every right, and will always boo a guy if he's not performing well for a game or some time. I remember Walker getting a standing ovation when he came back with Dallas, I also remember the crowd give him another ovation when he came back to play for the C's. What people on the message board say, and what paying costumers thing is way different. The majority of the fans in the Fleet will support Toine.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

Delontes Herpes said:


> my point was before the trade, googs, perk were getting backup minutes and blount was getting starter minutes.
> 
> after the trade, antoine took away all of googs minutes, most of perk's minutes, and a decent portion of blount's minutes as he was demoted to a backup.
> 
> and that's the main reason why the team was better after the trade...not because walker made pierce happy since they're best buds 4eva


Taking away minutes from Blount = good thing
Taking away minutes from Perkins = bad bad thing


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

whiterhino said:


> Taking away minutes from Blount = good thing
> Taking away minutes from Perkins = bad bad thing


Why? Antoine is better than Perkins.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

Premier said:


> Why? Antoine is better than Perkins.


That's not what I meant, Perkins can't lose minutes right now, he doesn't get enough to begin with and he's our future big man. Perkins minutes should not have been cut.....right when he was starting to break through and really show his potential. Perkins is our future Center, you have to develop him....remember he's only 2 months older than Al Jefferson. 
I am all for keeping Antoine as long as it does not cut into Al & Perk's minutes, cut into someone elses instead. If it's going to cut into theirs then I regretfully would have to say let him go but I don't see why Blount cannot be cut out of the rotation entirely instead :clown:


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

He's twenty years old. He doesn't deserve minutes right now. Let him get his expereince in practice until he proves that he is better than Blount (for the backup job next to Al Jefferson).


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

Premier said:


> He's twenty years old. He doesn't deserve minutes right now. Let him get his expereince in practice until he proves that he is better than Blount (for the backup job next to Al Jefferson).


Oh I TOTALLY disagree with you on this one Premier, he DOES deserve minutes and he's already MORE THAN PROVED he's way better than Blount. He's already earned 20 mpg all day long in my book. Come on I know you watch the games, Perk is already our best defensive big man by far, the only thing keeping him down is a lack of minutes. He's already done the practice thing, now he's proved he deserves FAR more than that. Blount can rot on the IL for all I care. Please don't tell me you'd rather have Blount in a game than Perk


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

At the end of last season, I would say Perkins performed better than Blount, but let's not forget that Blount just came off a great season in which he _earned _forty-two million dollars. Right now, Blount is a better player than Perkins and until Perkins shows he _can _play twenty minutes per game without commiting five fouls, I would play Blount in favor of Perkins. Don't get me wrong, I like Perkins, but I'd rather trust a veteran even one as lazy as Blount.

_If _Perkins shows that he is far and above a better player than Blount, he would already be getting his minutes. Marcus Banks, on the other hand...


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

whiterhino said:


> Taking away minutes from Blount = good thing
> Taking away minutes from Perkins = bad bad thing


taking away minutes from perkins is a GREAT thing...assuming that you like to see the celtics win.

he simply is not ready to play yet


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

whiterhino said:


> Oh I TOTALLY disagree with you on this one Premier, he DOES deserve minutes and he's already MORE THAN PROVED he's way better than Blount. He's already earned 20 mpg all day long in my book. Come on I know you watch the games, Perk is already our best defensive big man by far, the only thing keeping him down is a lack of minutes. He's already done the practice thing, now he's proved he deserves FAR more than that. Blount can rot on the IL for all I care. Please don't tell me you'd rather have Blount in a game than Perk


He may have earned 20 mpg all day long in your book, but he has not earned that in glenn rivers's book. and that is the book that matters.

i know doc isn't perfect, but he sees things that casual fans don't, and i'll trust him with handling playing time. besides, i would rather see the young guys earn their minutes than get them by default.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

by the way, the more i think about it, the more i think we NEED to resign toine. if we're optimistic, jefferson can give us 25 a game, raef can give us 25, blount (or his replacement) can give us 18. that gives us 68 total big man minutes, we need 96. we're going to need AT LEAST 28 more.

where do the other 28 come from? anyone that we may draft or trade toine for will be a significant downgrade from toine himself. we will be able to make a deal with our expiring contracts 2/3 way into the season in february, but even then who will we trade for? joe smith? pj brown?

if we enter the season with a roster of banks, west, allen, davis, pierce, reed, jefferson, raef, perkins, our new rookies, and some cheap veteran signings...this team is going to be significantly worse than it was this year. if we don't get toine back, danny's going to need to bring in somebody from somewhere to replace him (as well as someone to replace GP, and possibly blount) and it's not like those type of guys fall out of trees. it should be an interesting summer.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

> You blame Toine for not being able to buy a foul against him? 22 shots were probably from inside the Arc in that game, and on 22 shots he does not get one call for him? What do you expect him to do?


of course I blame Antoine for not getting to the line. WHo should I blame - Kobe Bryant? The refs? Granted the refs probably do not love him. But Walker is the worst at working the refs. And that happens to be part of the game as well. And yes - I blame Walker. He has no idea how to draw a foul. Yes he takes SOME shots inside the arc. But watch him shoot. He is more concerned about getting blocked than getting a foul. He almost NEVER goes hard to the basket.



> What people on the message board say, and what paying costumers thing is way different. The majority of the fans in the Fleet will support Toine.


How are you the athority on paying fans? I am a paying fan. I don't want to pay to see him play for the Celtics. ANd I'd bet if there was a poll people at the Flett would agree.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> But again if not for his crap play in regulation there would have been no need for heroics in OT. Walker in game 6 went 11 for 26. *11 for 26*! That's heroic??? In addition he had ZERO free throw attempts on 26 shots. Is that even possible. You can not get to the line ONCE on 26 shots? That is amazing. With the way Walker shoots he should not be shooting nearly 26 shots.



he was 9-15 after halftime...his bad play was in the first half...not in regulation...11 for 26 is not as bad as ur making it out to be....its 43%...and if you noticed how well he played in the 2nd half and overtime ud realize that it was heroic...dont look at numbers...look at the game and judge by the game...the box score means little to nothing


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> How are you the athority on paying fans? I am a paying fan. I don't want to pay to see him play for the Celtics. ANd I'd bet if there was a poll people at the Flett would agree.



so whats the reason for ticket sales increasing so dramatically after antoine was traded back here??...apparently those extra thousands of fans that came in flocks to buy tickets after his return would want him back or they wouldnt have sold out the fleet every game after his return


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Causeway said:


> of course I blame Antoine for not getting to the line. WHo should I blame - Kobe Bryant? The refs? Granted the refs probably do not love him. But Walker is the worst at working the refs. And that happens to be part of the game as well. And yes - I blame Walker. He has no idea how to draw a foul. Yes he takes SOME shots inside the arc. But watch him shoot. He is more concerned about getting blocked than getting a foul. He almost NEVER goes hard to the basket.
> 
> 
> 
> How are you the athority on paying fans? I am a paying fan. I don't want to pay to see him play for the Celtics. ANd I'd bet if there was a poll people at the Flett would agree.


Most of his shots are inside the arc, in fact most of his shots are within a few feet from the basket. As you have said, Antoine is a hated player by the refs. Not only doesn't he get fouls for him, he gets a lot offensive ones against him. They call him for moving screens while the other team does the same and doesn't get called for it, and he gets called for stupid fouls when he puts his back on a player. Don't get my started on the hooking, there's not one player that doesn't do it.

About the Fans part, maybe I wasn't clear enough, but 18,000 fans gave him a standing ovation when he came back....twice. The poll has already been taken, and the fact that there were 2,500-3,000 more fans per game since he came back, that all of New England actually cared about the Celtics speaks a bit at least, right?


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> About the Fans part, maybe I wasn't clear enough, but 18,000 fans gave him a standing ovation when he came back....twice. The poll has already been taken, and the fact that there were 2,500-3,000 more fans per game since he came back, that all of New England actually cared about the Celtics speaks a bit at least, right?



right


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

> dont look at numbers...look at the game and judge by the game...the box score means little to nothing


The box score does not mean everything - agreed. Stats can be twisted to support any side really. However I would not at all say the the box score means _little to nothing_. In the end it means a lot. And over time the box score shows patterns. And Walker has a pattern of shooting too much and getting to the line too little. Blame it on the refs if you want but it's a fact.



> so whats the reason for ticket sales increasing so dramatically after antoine was traded back here??...apparently those extra thousands of fans that came in flocks to buy tickets after his return would want him back or they wouldnt have sold out the fleet every game after his return


Yes the Fleet sold some tickets. There's 2 reasons for that. One was people were curious. Walker was an old Celtics come back. There were some good days with him in the past. However if we had signed Dennis Rodman I am sure ticket sales would go up for a little while as well. 

The other reason was we went on a winning streak and a playoff push. THat is exiting and fun. And Walker gets some credit for that push but not as much as he is getting in here. And that did not last either. We still got knocked out in the first round. Just like last season without Walker. 

I would bet if Walker comes back next season it would now have zero positive effect on ticket sales.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> Most of his shots are inside the arc, in fact most of his shots are within a few feet from the basket. As you have said, Antoine is a hated player by the refs. Not only doesn't he get fouls for him, he gets a lot offensive ones against him. They call him for moving screens while the other team does the same and doesn't get called for it, and he gets called for stupid fouls when he puts his back on a player. Don't get my started on the hooking, there's not one player that doesn't do it.


You are making my point. If as you say "most of his shots are within a few feet from the basket" shouldn't you get to the line once in a while - if not a lot? And let's say you are right. Let's say the fact that Walker can not get to the line has NOTHING to do with his ability to draw a foul and everything to do with the refs hating Walker. Who's fault is that? ANd isn't that still a negative against Walker? Working the refs counts. He can not do that either.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Causeway said:


> You are making my point. If as you say "most of his shots are within a few feet from the basket" shouldn't you get to the line once in a while - if not a lot? And let's say you are right. Let's say the fact that Walker can not get to the line has NOTHING to do with his ability to draw a foul and everything to do with the refs hating Walker. Who's fault is that? ANd isn't that still a negative against Walker? Working the refs counts. He can not do that either.



And Paul isn't doing the same? This season he's been doing it as much as Walker, if not more. Yet he gets to the line. Even when he does get hit, they don't call anything for him. How is that a negative? 

I don't know if you watched the Mavs-Suns game last night, but Dirk was complaining against all the non-calls yet he still got 10 free throw attempts, 2nd most in the game.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

Exactly. Even with Dirk complaining he gets to the line. Why? Because he knows how to draw a foul and he's not afraid to take it to the basket. Two things (among others) Walker does not do.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> And Paul isn't doing the same? This season he's been doing it as much as Walker, if not more. Yet he gets to the line. Even when he does get hit, they don't call anything for him. How is that a negative?


Comparing Pierce to Walker as far as getting to the line is a joke. Pierce gets the the line better than anyone *in the NBA*. He is AMAZING at drawing fouls. In addition he takes it hard to the basket all the time. Pierce looks for traffic. Walker avoids contact at ALL costs. There is ZERO comparison.



> Even when he does get hit, they don't call anything for him. How is that a negative?


How is that a negative? - BECAUSE WALKER DOES NOT GET TO THE LINE. That is the bottom line. Make all the excuses you want - but it's a fact. And it hurts his and the teams numbers.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

2 reasons why toine doesn't get to the line

1) the refs hate him
2) he falls away from the basket a lot...he never even tries to draw fouls.

#2 being the main reason

the refs don't love pierce but he gets to the line because he slashes to the hoop and is good at drawing fouls.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

Delontes Herpes said:


> 2 reasons why toine doesn't get to the line
> 
> 1) the refs hate him
> 2) he falls away from the basket a lot...he never even tries to draw fouls.
> ...


Exactly. And both #1 and #2 count as huge negatives against Walker.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

yep, it's one of my biggest pet peeves about antoine's game. also he can barely shoot FTs at 50% anymore. he'll give you 19 points a game but it will take him 18 shots to get there.

at the same time though...there's no one we can pick up to replace him.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

Walker gets no respect from the refs and he just doesn't initate contact a whole lot, whereas Pierce (among other things) loves the fake shot/lean into leaping defender which draws a foul all the time. It's actually disgusting that Walker shoots mid-fifties from the line. There is NO reason Walker shouldn't be knocking down FT's. It's not like he's Shaq or uncoordinated. Only two reasons I can think why Antoine Walker hits on about 55% of his FT's:

1) He's lazy and won't work on it.
2) He's lost his confidence, in which case he shouldn't have the confidence to jack up threes.

Seriously, I know there's pressure and all, but hell, I could shoot 70% in the A, and I routinely make 45 outta 50 at the Y (yeah, I know it's different, thats why I knocked 20% off my average). Fact is, FT's shouldn't be a huge challenge for an NBA player.

So to summarize - you shoot 55% from the stripe, that's a sign that you shouldn't jack up triples.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

walker shot 70% in 99-00, 71.6% in 00-01, 74% in 01-02. i doubt he just stopped working on his free throws altogether at that point. he just hit a mental block at the line and has yet to overcome it.

the difference between FTs and 3's is that when you get an open look at a 3 you have to launch before you can start worrying about missing. at the charity stripe, you have plenty of time to worry about missing.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

Delontes Herpes said:


> walker shot 70% in 99-00, 71.6% in 00-01, 74% in 01-02. i doubt he just stopped working on his free throws altogether at that point.


Exactly. I didn't mean that was what he has done, just that it's one of the few plausible explanations for his atrocious FT shooting.



> he just hit a mental block at the line and has yet to overcome it.


Which is sad. 15 mil a year and you can't sink free throws? He's getting paid big bucks in part to score, and often a large part of scoring is FT's. He's not getting paid to have mental blocks and shoot 55% from the line. Perhaps I'm a little harsh on this, but I don't accept any excuses from a potential 75% FT shooter who bricks half his attempts from the line.



> the difference between FTs and 3's is that when you get an open look at a 3 you have to launch before you can start worrying about missing.


That and I don't really think Antoine Walker cares about missing threes. If he was half as concerned about missing 3's as he seems to be with FT's, I'd be happy, because he wouldn't take so damn many. 



> at the charity stripe, you have plenty of time to worry about missing.


It remains that it's still a simple shot that any NBA player (nevermind one making 15 mil per) should drain with consistency.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

look at tim duncan...he shot 80% one year and 2 years later he won down to 60%.

it can happen to anyone.

also toine cut down his 3 pt attempts during his return to boston...he shot 3 a game at 34%...i can live with that. and there is no evidence that he doesn't care about missing FTs. he could be practicing them a fair amount but to no avail. not to say that he has been working his *** off to get over this mental block but i'm not going to knock him for a lack of effort with no evidence to back it up.

but i completely agree with you about pros who can't shoot free throws. i don't see how any NBA player shoots under 80%. it's such an easy shot.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> Which is sad. 15 mil a year and you can't sink free throws? He's getting paid big bucks in part to score, and often a large part of scoring is FT's. He's not getting paid to have mental blocks and shoot 55% from the line. Perhaps I'm a little harsh on this, but I don't accept any excuses from a potential 75% FT shooter who bricks half his attempts from the line.
> 
> It remains that it's still a simple shot that any NBA player (nevermind one making 15 mil per) should drain with consistency.



(cough) shaq (cough)...30 mill a yr...why does he get a free pass then with ur logic he sux


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> (cough) shaq (cough)...30 mill a yr...why does he get a free pass then with ur logic he sux


Is a response to this really necessary? Shaq to Antoine? Shaq should hit more FT's. However there's a few things. One is at least the guy can get to the lin. The other is that every other part of his game is vastly superior to Antoine's. So while he should hit more FT's I'd happily take Shaq while at the same time I hope Walker is gone.

I DO however fell that FT's are a good gage of how good your outside shot is. SHaq does not need one and hardly shoots betond a foot or two. Walker does. And his shot stinks.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Causeway said:


> Exactly. Even with Dirk complaining he gets to the line. Why? Because he knows how to draw a foul and he's not afraid to take it to the basket. Two things (among others) Walker does not do.


Toine has a horrible looking shot, so it would be stupid for him to do the "Pierce pump fake," no one would ever bite. The thing is, Toine does take it to the basket, not as much as he did in the begining of his career, but once you keep getting non-calls it kind of kills your mentality. Why sacrifice your body day in day out if nothing will be called for you?


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Causeway said:



> Comparing Pierce to Walker as far as getting to the line is a joke. Pierce gets the the line better than anyone *in the NBA*. He is AMAZING at drawing fouls. In addition he takes it hard to the basket all the time. Pierce looks for traffic. Walker avoids contact at ALL costs. There is ZERO comparison.


I was actually comparing Pierce arguing with the refs....



> How is that a negative? - BECAUSE WALKER DOES NOT GET TO THE LINE. That is the bottom line. Make all the excuses you want - but it's a fact. And it hurts his and the teams numbers.


He does not get to the line because no matter how much contact gets created 90% of the time the refs will "oversee" it.

Even when he lives under the basket the guy can't buy a call.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> (cough) shaq (cough)...30 mill a yr...why does he get a free pass then with ur logic he sux


This reponse is well...I don't want to say stupid, but it wasn't very well thought out. For one, Shaq is twice the player Antoine Walker is or ever will be. O'Neal is the most dominant player in the game, he changes the gameplans of the opposition on both ends of the court. When Walker can totally dominate, score, rebound, block shots, etc, then I won't ***** about his free throw shooting. And although Shaq's been brutal, it is much harder for a guy his size to sink FT's...just the mechanics of it.

I understand that you're an AW fan, and I don't blame you. Guy's done some great things for Boston. I just think you shoulda thought that one through a little better.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

Delontes Herpes said:


> look at tim duncan...he shot 80% one year and 2 years later he won down to 60%.


But when you're Tim Duncan, that's a little more excuseable because you're one of the top offensive and defensive players in the NBA.



> also toine cut down his 3 pt attempts during his return to boston...he shot 3 a game at 34%...i can live with that.


That can be deceiving though. I can think of 2-3 games offhand (and I see few Celtic games due to the fact I live in Western Canada) that I saw where 'Toine jacked up an atrocious shot at a terrible time for the team.



> and there is no evidence that he doesn't care about missing FTs. he could be practicing them a fair amount but to no avail.


I never said there was. I was using your example of worrying about them, and saying IF this was the case, he should worry as much about 3's as he does about FT's. 



> not to say that he has been working his *** off to get over this mental block but i'm not going to knock him for a lack of effort with no evidence to back it up.


Neither am I, and I didn't.



> but i completely agree with you about pros who can't shoot free throws. i don't see how any NBA player shoots under 80%. it's such an easy shot.


Pressure, etc. I guess, but that's why you're a professional. And the thing is, what else do you have to do with your life? Your job is to play basketball. Not like these guys couldn't go to the gym every day and shoot FT's to their heart's content. It's one of the few things in basketball you can practice game speed, game intensity, etc. completely on your own.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> This reponse is well...I don't want to say stupid, but it wasn't very well thought out. For one, Shaq is twice the player Antoine Walker is or ever will be. O'Neal is the most dominant player in the game, he changes the gameplans of the opposition on both ends of the court. When Walker can totally dominate, score, rebound, block shots, etc, then I won't ***** about his free throw shooting. And although Shaq's been brutal, it is much harder for a guy his size to sink FT's...just the mechanics of it.
> 
> I understand that you're an AW fan, and I don't blame you. Guy's done some great things for Boston. I just think you shoulda thought that one through a little better.


lol i agree i guess that was an impulse response but all i was trying to get across is that just bc toine cant ever seem to hit a free throw doesnt mean he isnt valueable to this team...he does do many other great things for the celtics...and i guarantee u if they get rid of toine and give his minutes to jefferson and perkins that this team will not be any good for at least 2-3 years and we will waste the prime of paul pierces career...lets see if perk will hti more free throws than toine...sure the young players will get minutes yadda yadda....but i want to win...give this team thats together right now a full training camp and a full year playing together...theyll do some damage...i dont think we need to make that many changes other than probably replacing payton with banks and siging a first rounder


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> He does not get to the line because no matter how much contact gets created 90% of the time the refs will "oversee" it.
> 
> Even when he lives under the basket the guy can't buy a call.


Sorry but again this is a negative on Walker no matter how it gets spinned. If you shoot as much as Walker you should get to the line once in a while. Blame the refs. Blame the fact that he does not want his body to get abused. Blame the fact that Walker does not go hard to the basket. Blame the fact that Walker shys away from contact. Blame the fact that Walker can not jump higher than and inch. Blame the fact that Walker gets his shot blocked too much. Blame Canada if you want.

The net result is he does not get to the line. That is a negative.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

causeway is correct.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Causeway said:


> Sorry but again this is a negative on Walker no matter how it gets spinned. If you shoot as much as Walker you should get to the line once in a while.


That's what I'm saying.



> Blame the refs.


Been doing that.



> Blame the fact that he does not want his body to get abused.


No fact, he does get abused, doesn't go to the line though.



> Blame the fact that Walker does not go hard to the basket.


With his back to it?



> Blame the fact that Walker shys away from contact.


Same point as the one above, he doesn't get the calls.



> Blame the fact that Walker can not jump higher than and inch.


Little exaggerated, but ok. He's not an athlete, he's not a high jumper.



> Blame the fact that Walker gets his shot blocked too much.


I seriously want to see that...I'm reading this a lot, but it's only coming from one person.



> The net result is he does not get to the line. That is a negative.


It is a negative, because he doesn't get any calls that a average 12th man gets.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

Walker truly does shy away from contact. That is the main reason why he doesn't get to the line.

The refs' hatred of him is the 2nd leading reason.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Delontes Herpes said:


> Walker truly does shy away from contact. That is the main reason why he doesn't get to the line.



id shy away from contact too if every time i got nailed while shooting i didnt get to the line...he has a better chance hitting a shot falling away from the basket and not gettin fouled than goin hard to the basket and getting fouled and not getting to the line


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

AND...as much as anyone hates him...u should understand that just his prescence on the court makes pierce a much better player...that alone should make you guys want him to be resigned


Pierce with walker = all star player

Pierce without walker = medieocre "star"


----------



## thekid (Apr 3, 2003)

If I were the Celtics, I'd keep Pierce and trade Walker. That was pretty easy.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> Pierce with walker = all star player
> 
> Pierce without walker = medieocre "star"


I guess the coaches have selected PP as an all-star two years in a row without Walker not really because he's an All-Star caliber player without him, but for some ulterior reason?


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> I guess the coaches have selected PP as an all-star two years in a row without Walker not really because he's an All-Star caliber player without him, but for some ulterior reason?



watch the games and youd be able to tell he is a much better player with walker than without...i can count the number of celtics games that i have missed in the last 5 years on my hands...with walker pp is one of the best players in the league...look at the 02-03 seasonhen he avgs 26 ppg...the next yr 23...this yr 21...yes his fg and 3pt % were both outstanding this year...but i have seen paul pierces game with walker and without...anyone who follows the celtics knows that pierce is a MUCH better plaer with walker than he is without him (and this goes vice versa as well)


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> watch the games and youd be able to tell he is a much better player with walker than without


So I prove what you say wrong and you tell me to "watch the games". PP likes playing with Walker. Granted. Walker takes a lot of pressure off PP. Granted again. Nobody's arguing that. But you act as if Walker is the ONLY guy who can do that. Bring in another solid player and you get the same result, with less ill-advised bricklaying, no doubt. 



> look at the 02-03 seasonhen he avgs 26 ppg...the next yr 23...this yr 21...


So you're saying the difference between P-Dub averaging 26 a game in '02 and 21 this year is Antoine Walker? Oh hold on, there may be another reason.

'02-'03 FGAT's/game : 20.2
'04-'05 FGAT's/game : 14.9

It's simple really. Take 5 less shots a game and you'll score less. If you're going to make it an argument could you base it on something more substantial than "Pierce is a better player with Walker, cos he put up 26/game when 'Toine was here". I could just as easily say PP shoots worse when Walker is here because his FG% and 3PT% were lower that year. I know what you're getting at, but just the way you presented your points was just...pretty weak.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> id shy away from contact too if every time i got nailed while shooting i didnt get to the line...he has a better chance hitting a shot falling away from the basket and not gettin fouled than goin hard to the basket and getting fouled and not getting to the line


These are excuses. If I heard these words out of Walkers mouth I'd say that was the weakest reason for not going hard and trying to draw fouls that I have ever heard.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> That's what I'm saying.
> I seriously want to see that...I'm reading this a lot [that Walker gets his shot blocked a lot], but it's only coming from one person.


If you want to see it watch some games. It no secret. But if you want to here it from some other sources here are some:

Hoopsworld


> He did his work facing the basket because he lacks explosiveness around the rim, and can be easily blocked by athletic players down low.


Boston Herald Forum 



> mkharsh " - Antoine has no lift: I've said repeatedly that he is not a gifted athlete and that he cannot get off the ground. "


more importantly watch...it's obvious. 





aquaitious said:


> It is a negative, because he doesn't get any calls that a average 12th man gets.


Why is that? Who's fault is that? And if it's true - it's STILL a negative against Antoine Walker*.*


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> So you're saying the difference between P-Dub averaging 26 a game in '02 and 21 this year is Antoine Walker? Oh hold on, there may be another reason.
> 
> '02-'03 FGAT's/game : 20.2
> '04-'05 FGAT's/game : 14.9
> ...



omg i dont have time to sit here and write a book with all of the reasons that walker makes pierce better...i was just using a quick example with the ppg...so u tell me something...why does he get 5 shots per game less this year??...pierce is a superstar and theres no reason why he should be taking less than 20 shots per game...hmmm lets see...when walker is/was here he would ALWAYS get the ball to pierce just where he liked it (ie the passes to him right underneath the basket for easy layups), and the opposing team could double team pp less frequently because he had another all star on the court with him to take some of the pressure off of him...without walker the opposition double teams pierce every time up the floor and he cant get as many shots up...so before u put down my points as weak look into them a little more


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

causeway that first article is from 2 years ago please dont use that as proof...obviously walker didnt play with his back to the basket much his first stint in boston...he did much more in the 20-something games back


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> causeway that first article is from 2 years ago please dont use that as proof...obviously walker didnt play with his back to the basket much his first stint in boston...he did much more in the 20-something games back


Why does it matter when that was from? If anything I'd say Walker has gotten worse in the last couple years. The only improvement is less 3's. However his shot in general has gotten worse so even his 2's are a low percentage shot. In addition the 3's that he does take are usually at the worst possible time. Generally it's on a fast break and he'll chuck one up that will kill some momentum. He should NEVER take threes.

And if you need articles to "proove" that Walker gets his shot blocked a lot than I'll assume you don't really watch the games. Against Indy alone in the recent playoffs I can think of at least three times Jermaine Oneil blocked Walkers flick shot.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> And if you need articles to "proove" that Walker gets his shot blocked a lot than I'll assume you don't really watch the games. Against Indy alone in the recent playoffs I can think of at least three times Jermaine Oneil blocked Walkers flick shot.


so jermaine oneal...one of the best shot blockers in the nba...blocked toines shots at least 3 times...whoopdifreakindoo...thats going to happen when u play againts a shot blocker...now if u wouldve said earl boykins blocked him 3 times...then i would agree with u


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

Earl Boykins could block Walkers shot.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> omg i dont have time to sit here and write a book with all of the reasons that walker makes pierce better...


I was never debating the fact that PP plays better with Walker on the court. It's something I believe as well. I'm just saying your argument is weak.



> i was just using a quick example with the ppg...so u tell me something...why does he get 5 shots per game less this year??...pierce is a superstar and theres no reason why he should be taking less than 20 shots per game...


The reason is Doc Rivers and his new system. It was designed to spread the ball around more and get more people involved and cut down on PP's shooting. Surprising you didn't know that, considering you watch all the games and follow the Celtics closely.



> and the opposing team could double team pp less frequently because he had another all star on the court with him to take some of the pressure off of him...


I agree wholeheartedly. Walker being on the court takes the total focus off of Pierce. I'm just saying it's not only Antoine Walker that can do this. This is what I consider a "pro" of having Walker on the team. Unfortunately, there are "cons" to think of as well and I believe those outnumber the pros.



> without walker the opposition double teams pierce every time up the floor and he cant get as many shots up...


Pierce had no problem jacking up 19/game last year without Walker. Unfortunately, lots of them were low percentage shots because he had to shoulder the entire load. I'm not saying I want this to be the PP only show, only that I don't want Walker anymore. I never denied he did good things for this team. I just think he hurts it a lot as well. I'm actually really surprised that you didn't know that Doc's new system is the reason Pierce cut down so drastically on his shots.



> so before u put down my points as weak look into them a little more


Like it or not, your original point was weak. "Paul Pierce is better with Walker because he had more ppg one year". 

I'm not arguing with your point, because it's valid. Just the way you presented your points prompted me to respond, because there is another side to the story as well that you were not telling. Pierce plays better with another high-caliber player on the court. But that other high-caliber player doesn't necessarily have to be Antoine Walker. Especially when that other player takes stupid shots, dominates the ball (and turns it over), blows layups, doesn't get to the line (and when he does he misses half his attempts), oh yes did I mention takes too many stupid shots?

Antoine Walker should NOT be out-shooting Paul Pierce in a playoff game. And Pierce has been around 15 FGAT's all year and we've been scoring over 100/game. If 'Toine could limit himself and buy into the system, and just play within it, and take, say 12 FG's a game, that'd be great. I wouldn't care if his scoring dropped to like 15ppg because he still grabs boards and is a good passer, and plus that's more production than we'll likely see from Al next year, anyways. But that's a big IF, and I don't think Walker could do it. He tried this year and failed miserably at playing within the system. You saw that as well as I did come playoff time.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> If 'Toine could limit himself and buy into the system, and just play within it, and take, say 12 FG's a game, that'd be great. I wouldn't care if his scoring dropped to like 15ppg because he still grabs boards and is a good passer, and plus that's more production than we'll likely see from Al next year, anyways. But that's a big IF, and I don't think Walker could do it. He tried this year and failed miserably at playing within the system. You saw that as well as I did come playoff time.



yes i agree that antoine didnt fully get the whole sistem this year but rememeber he had 25 games to "buy into it"...thats not enough time at all...thats a preseason for most players...im saying give him and this team a whole camp preseason and regular season and they will definetly be better than they were this year...which was pretty good as it is...if the celts let him go they r not going to get another "high caliber player" to come here...they cant because fo the cap situaion...so its either sign walker back or let him go for probably nothing...ill take the first option


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> yes i agree that antoine didnt fully get the whole sistem this year but rememeber he had 25 games to "buy into it"...thats not enough time at all...thats a preseason for most players...im saying give him and this team a whole camp preseason and regular season and they will definetly be better than they were this year...which was pretty good as it is...*if the celts let him go they r not going to get another "high caliber player" to come here*...they cant because fo the cap situaion...so its either sign walker back or let him go for probably nothing...ill take the first option


I guess this is a big part of where we differ. Walker has "high caliber" potential. Unfortunately he has a very low caliber head. And I am not sure I remember a 25 game pre-season. The bottom line is Walker has had plenty more than 25 games. He has been in the NBA for long enough to know that he should shoot less 3's and less in general. He has cut down on the 3's but he still takes too many at very bad times. In addition his shooting and holding the ball limits ball movement and takes the team out of it's game. Again it's more and more excuses with Walker:

He needs more time.
The refs don't like him.
blah blah blah.

The reality is he hurts the team. A sign-and-trade with Walker is very possible and should land a very solid player who might not have the "talent" of Walker but who hopefully will be much smarter and not do as many things to hurt the team.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> yes i agree that antoine didnt fully get the whole sistem this year but rememeber he had 25 games to "buy into it"...


That's a good point but the troublesome thing is, he played well within it during the season and then come playoffs POOF he decided he didn't need to anymore.



> im saying give him and this team a whole camp preseason and regular season and they will definetly be better than they were this year...


I don't think Walker will ever fully buy in. 



> which was pretty good as it is...if the celts let him go they r not going to get another "high caliber player" to come here...


I know, but having AW forcing bad shots and making poor decisions nightly (as he did in the playoffs) is a huge disruption and it just kills the team.



> The reality is he hurts the team. A sign-and-trade with Walker is very possible and should land a very solid player who might not have the "talent" of Walker but who hopefully will be much smarter and not do as many things to hurt the team.


Agree 100%. Unfortunately AW really killed some of his trade value this playoff.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

> Unfortunately AW really killed some of his trade value this playoff.


Agreed. I am not sure what that value was. Atlanta got Walker for very little. And the Celtics got Walker back for even less. However agreed - the playoffs showed that in reality Walker has not changed at all for the better and his value has to be very low.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> I guess this is a big part of where we differ. Walker has "high caliber" potential. Unfortunately he has a very low caliber head. And I am not sure I remember a 25 game pre-season. The bottom line is Walker has had plenty more than 25 games. He has been in the NBA for long enough to know that he should shoot less 3's and less in general. He has cut down on the 3's but he still takes too many at very bad times. In addition his shooting and holding the ball limits ball movement and takes the team out of it's game.



OMG ok the preseason is what 10 games and they have training camp before that...to me thats the equivalent of 25 games...jeez...and another thing...walker playes 55 games where he is the main scorer on his team and all he is really supposed to do is put up 20-25 shots a game...o but its real easy to switch your style of play overnight and start playing a different way...there a reason for trainign camp and the preseason...its to work on stuff like this...toine didnt get the benefit of that and did the best job that he could do with the alotted amount fo time that he had...we were 21-13 with walker no matter which way u put it (and 2 of those losses barely count they were the ones at the end of the regular season...that is much better than the 27-28 without him...a full season with the team thats together now and we'd be a 50-55 win team


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> Atlanta got Walker for very little.



atlanta got walker for jason terry...who is a bonifide star in this league...he proved it in the playoffs when he carried the mavs through some tough games...hardly "very little"


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

I'm done arguing about Antoine Walker, because, apparently, nothing is ever his fault. Nothing at all. It's impossible to have a discussion because nothing but excuses, excuses, and more excuses are being made for Walker's play. AWF straight up refuses to accept that anything could be wrong with his golden boy.

Answer me this, then. Why did Walker play so well within the system during the year, and then almost overnight revert into "old Walker" for the playoffs? If he couldn't play in the system, *why did he do it all year until the postseason*?

And Jason Terry is not even a Top 50 player in the NBA, no way he's a "bonafide star".


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> OMG ok the preseason is what 10 games and they have training camp before that...to me thats the equivalent of 25 games...jeez...and another thing...walker playes 55 games where he is the main scorer on his team and all he is really supposed to do is put up 20-25 shots a game...o but its real easy to switch your style of play overnight and start playing a different way...there a reason for trainign camp and the preseason...its to work on stuff like this...toine didnt get the benefit of that and did the best job that he could do with the alotted amount fo time that he had...we were 21-13 with walker no matter which way u put it (and 2 of those losses barely count they were the ones at the end of the regular season...that is much better than the 27-28 without him...a full season with the team thats together now and we'd be a 50-55 win team


Sorry but it's just more excuses. He is what is is. And what he is hurts the team. If at this point in his career he does not know where his stregnths are than another full season is not going to do that. Dallas did not need him to put up 20-25 shots a game - yet they traded him pretty fast. And using your theory - how come Walker got worse in the playoffs than in the regular season - including taking more shots? .



> a full season with the team thats together now and we'd be a 50-55 win team


please.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

if we bring back walker, find a suitable replacement for payton with the MLE, and raef stays healthy again, we SHOULD win 50-53 the young guys are all gonna progress and the team will have a full offseason and season to jell and to incorporate 'toine into the offense.

that's not THAT great of an improvement over the 45 wins we had last year.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

Delontes Herpes said:


> if we bring back walker, find a suitable replacement for payton with the MLE, and raef stays healthy again, we SHOULD win 50-53 the young guys are all gonna progress and the team will have a full offseason and season to jell and to incorporate 'toine into the offense.
> 
> that's not THAT great of an improvement over the 45 wins we had last year.


I disagree. I feel that the positive effect of Walker even after "only" 25 games was wearing off or was gone come playoff time. Not only did the real Walker stand up and start jacking up shots like he was still on the Hawks (or like the Walker we first saw in Boston). But it has a negative impact on the players around him. All those touches and shots for Walker means less involvement for other players. That means less shots for other players. That means less learning/confindence for other - especially younger - players. 

Over a course of a season the net effect would be a worse team than the one that was around .500 when Walker showed up.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

I was just thinking, if Walker could do the this over the next campaign, I would love to have him back at 6-7 mil per.

*Put up 15ppg/9rpg/3apg on 45%+ shooting and 12 FGAT's/game.*
Shooting 42% is atrocious for a PF in this league. Look at LaFrentz. He shoots threes all the time but his FG% is still around 50% because he only takes shots he knows he can make and doesn't force the issue. Walker is a more talented player and if he followed LaFrentz's line of thinking I know he could be a 15ppg scorer on 45%+ shooting. Included in this deal is no more than 2 3FG's/game. IF Walker buys into Doc's strategy, and does the following, I'd love to have him back.

Unfortunately, I don't see it. And that's why I don't want AW back.

EDIT: Wow, I just realized Walker shot 39% in '01-'02. Holy ****, that's bad. I know it doesn't relate to this post but wow, that is TRASH.No Masking Please - Whiterhino


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

that guy you just wrote about would cost more than 6-7 mil a year. he would probably cost about 10 mil (see: lamar odom).


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> EDIT: Wow, I just realized Walker shot 39% in '01-'02. Holy fk, that's bad. I know it doesn't relate to this post but wow, that is TRASH.


That is beyond trash - ESPECIALLY for a PF. As I have been trying to say - the guy should not be shooting anywhere near 20 shots a game.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

yeah with an awful player like toine and pierce's bad attitude and the best players surrounding them being eric williams, tony battie, kenny anderson, and rodney rogers, it's no wonder that the celtics sucked so much that year.

wait, they were 2 wins within going to the NBA finals that year? nevermind.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

Delontes Herpes said:


> yeah with an awful player like toine and pierce's bad attitude and the best players surrounding them being eric williams, tony battie, kenny anderson, and rodney rogers, it's no wonder that the celtics sucked so much that year.
> 
> wait, they were 2 wins within going to the NBA finals that year? nevermind.


Yes they were 2 wins within going to the NBA finals that year. However let's talk about the reality of that. FIrst of all - has the Eastern conf. ever been weaker than that year? Do you remember what happened to the team that beat us - the Nets? They got embarrassed in the finals.

In addition we won shooting 3's all day long. That can get you by for a little while but that's not going to put #17 in the rafters. That is what I am looking for. That is what the Celtics are about. We don't hang Eastern Conf Finals banners in the rafters like other teams.

I would not trade this roster for that roster for anything.

And by the way the 3-point master himself Jim OBrien was just fired.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

i know what you mean. but toine only shot 3 threes a game at 34.2% for us this year. that does absolutely nothing to hurt us. but i do understand that he's not the perfect player, his game has warts all over it, and there are much better PFs in the league.

that said, we don't have any options nearly as good as him to take his minutes and i think it's worth it to consider giving him a 2-3 year deal.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

Delontes Herpes said:


> i know what you mean. but toine only shot 3 threes a game at 34.2% for us this year. that does absolutely nothing to hurt us. but i do understand that he's not the perfect player, his game has warts all over it, and there are much better PFs in the league.
> 
> that said, we don't have any options nearly as good as him to take his minutes and i think it's worth it to consider giving him a 2-3 year deal.


It actually does hurt us. And Walker hurts us.

Many of the 3 threes Walker shoots are at terrible times. For example with the team on a run - during a fast break where a 2 or a dunk would really get the team and the crowd pumped - and his missed 3 deflates everthing. In addition many missed 3's lead to long rebounds and 2 points for the other team.

In addition he does not shoot the 3 that well and really should not be shooting it period. He's a PF. Also when you are missing over 75% of the time the ball could be used better.

As far as not having any options as good as him I totally disagree. The problem with Walker is not his talent. He has a lot. It's that he is a knucklehead. Walkers mistakes and 20+ shots hurt - don't help - the team. We can easily find less of a knucklehead than Walker and be better off for it.

And by the way - Al Jefferson will be a year older and is damn good. Still young and needs to learn - but he has the head.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> that guy you just wrote about would cost more than 6-7 mil a year.


Or Walker could just get his 6-7 mil deal and work on his game so that he can become that player. If you think it should take Walker more than 12-13 shots to amass 15 points, then you'd have to agree that he's an inefficient scorer and that probably isn't what is best for the team.

As well, Walker's triples do hurt the team, because he picks the worst possible times to take them. I've played with guys who have Walker's mindset. They mean well, they're just not smart players.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

if we resign walker it's going to be closer to 8-9 mil that it will 6-7.

and i just don't see how you can conclude that having him hurts us. he left us, we got worse. he came back, we got better. i'm not saying that definitively makes him a great asset, but that certainly offers no support that he makes us worse. plus we won 3 playoff series in 2 years with him, pierce, and GARBAGE.

complain all you want about the flaws in his game (i share your gripes) but he is a bonafide NBA player. if we decide to sign and trade him for expiring contracts and a future 1st rounder, that's fine by me. but if we can't get that, we may as well keep him as a stopgap.

another reason why a 2 or 3 year deal may be optimal- next offseason both tayshaun prince and ben wallace are free agents. if the pistons decide they can't keep them both, walkers contract opens up a potential sign and trade. a guy who can play productive minutes with only 1-2 years left plus a couple first rounders could land us a very good player. i know this is a longshot, but it's worth keeping in mind...and even if we don't land one of those guys he will be an expiring contract rather soon, and that alone will give him trade value.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> he left us, we got worse. he came back, we got better.


Although there were many factors as to why we got better when he came back, the main one was that Antoine was playing the way Doc wanted him to. I've said all along but nobody seems to listen. If he plays the way Doc wants him to, then he'd be great to have back. But who does he think he is that come playoff time he can totally disregard what we've been doing all year and make it the Antoine Walker show? I just don't think Walker can handle not jacking up 15-20-25 for a whole year. I don't think he can play within Doc's system. And when we have 4 guys trying to do one thing and one guy trying to do another, it DOES hurt us.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

> but if we can't get that, we may as well keep him as a stopgap.


Walker will never be happy as a stopgap guy or even a roll player. If he could do that he'd be great. But he needs the ball and he needs to shoot. That hurts us. P-Dub34's post above sums it up very well.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Pierce started playing in Doc's system right away, and now he's very happy...as he was all year round...


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> Pierce started playing in Doc's system right away, and now he's very happy...as he was all year round...


LOL...i love the sarcasm :biggrin: 


and causeway in response to ur "please" comment when i said theyd be a 50-55 win team next year...we won 45 this year even tho we tanked the last 2...if you dont think that having antoine for an extra 60 games would give us at least a 5 game improvement i have one word for u...PLEASE


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan I know you are the #1 Antoine Walker Fan - however - no. I do not think that Walker makes the Celtics a better team by any amount of games. I think he makes us a worse team for reasons I have stated above. Namely poor shot selection, poor shooting %, poor shot, too many shots etc.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Causeway said:


> #1AntoineWalkerFan I know you are the #1 Antoine Walker Fan - however - no. I do not think that Walker makes the Celtics a better team by any amount of games. I think he makes us a worse team for reasons I have stated above. Namely poor shot selection, poor shooting %, poor shot, too many shots etc.



I was perfectly fine if we let Antoine walk, but now that I still see that people are wearing those green shades maybe it's best if he stays.


----------



## Delontes Herpes (May 11, 2005)

We won't let Antoine "walk"- we have to AT LEAST sign and trade him


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> #1AntoineWalkerFan I know you are the #1 Antoine Walker Fan - however - no. I do not think that Walker makes the Celtics a better team by any amount of games. I think he makes us a worse team for reasons I have stated above. Namely poor shot selection, poor shooting %, poor shot, too many shots etc.



ur so right...he made us such a terrible team when he came back...because of toine our record went from an AWESOME 27-28 to a TERRIBLE 21-13...i think that if kendrick perkins was in the game instead of walker maybe we couldve gone 34-0 in those last games


stay looking at the numbers and the box scores...ill stay looking at the impact he has on the games...


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

#1AWF, you continually miss the point and bring up the "we got better when Walker came back" argument. There's a few reasons as to why we started winning when Walker came back, namely that getting him back was a shot in the arm for the club and we went on a hot streak. It was just a jolt for the team. But the main reason we got better, and bear with me here because God knows you've been ignoring this very point all thread:

*WALKER MADE US A BETTER TEAM WHEN HE PLAYED WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF DOC RIVERS' SYSTEM.*

And then, come playoff time, Walker decides he doesn't need to play in the system anymore. Hell, even Paul Pierce - who has had attitude problems all year and issues with Doc and such- stayed within its bounds and put up reasonable (and selective) shots. That's why he shot 50% for the series, and led it in scoring (not to mention rebounding). In sharp contrast, playing outside of the system is why Antoine Walker was sub-40% for most of the series.

Now did you bother to actually read that this go around? In case you don't feel like reading that, I'll sum up:

*Walker playing within system = Good
Walker playing outside of system = Bad*

And I'm almost certain Walker won't play within the bounds of Doc's system next year. It's funny; you'd think guys like Payton would get in his ear and tell him not to be such a ******* out there. Obviously not.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> God knows you've been ignoring this very point all thread:
> 
> *WALKER MADE US A BETTER TEAM WHEN HE PLAYED WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF DOC RIVERS' SYSTEM.*
> 
> ...



maybe you have been ignoring my whole point in this entire thread...

*I AGREE THAT WALKER MADE US BETTER WHEN HE PLAYED IN DOCS SYSTEM AND HE HURT US WHEN HE DIDNT* 

how do u have any idea whether or not walker will play within docs system next year?...you dont...its an assumption...how do u figure that if you give him a training camp, pre-season, and entire regular season that he wont learn how to play in docs scheme...u think its just so easy to pick up a scheme and learn an entire playbook in 25 games...newsflash...its not...even doc said at some point at the end of the season that antoine still only knew about half of the playbook...this could be a big reason why he reverted back to the old walker...back to what HE KNEW how to do...if walker is allowed to spend more time with this team and this coaching staff it is MUCH more likely that he will stay playing the way he did for the first 11 or 12 games back


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> ur so right...he made us such a terrible team when he came back...because of toine our record went from an AWESOME 27-28 to a TERRIBLE 21-13...i think that if kendrick perkins was in the game instead of walker maybe we couldve gone 34-0 in those last games
> 
> 
> stay looking at the numbers and the box scores...ill stay looking at the impact he has on the games...


Haven't we already gone over this about 6 times?

Yes - the Cetics went on a nice run when Walker came back.

Yes - during that time Walker played within Docs system and more importantly the way he should be playing anyway. I think there also was and adrenaline rush from having him back.

Yes - towards the end of the season and more importantly the PLAYOFFS the real Walker showed up. The one that makes teams worse. The one that made the Celtics worse. The one who im my opinion cost us the series. The same guy who shoots too much, has a crap shooting %, takes 3's a crappy times, does not move the ball well, can NOT get to the line. etc. etc. etc.

Rest on that 21-13 moment if you like. That was nice but Walker showed he's still Walker in the end. It's how you finish not how you start. Walker finished like a chump. If you want to hang a 21-13 banner in your room go for it. I want more.

Anyway - I know someone who saw Mike Gorman at a dinner the other night. Gorman said the Celtics are going to clean house and Walker is gone. That is the best news I have heard in a while. He also said they will try and move Davis - he's more of a problem than it seems. I am a Davis fan so was not happy to hear this but if he's a problem he's a problem. He said Pierce will be shopped as well.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> Haven't we already gone over this about 6 times?
> 
> Yes - the Cetics went on a nice run when Walker came back.
> 
> ...



did u read the last post i made or did u conveniently skip over it??...and i know someone whos uncle is the dog groomer for danny ainges 2nd cousin...and he said that they r going to resign walker and not trade pierce


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> did u read the last post i made or did u conveniently skip over it??...and i know someone whos uncle is the dog groomer for danny ainges 2nd cousin...and he said that they r going to resign walker and not trade pierce


I saw your post. And it's full of the same stuff you have been posing on Walker - excuses. His not getting to the line is the refs fault. His crappy play at the end of the season was due to not knowing the play book (even though he played BETTER when he first arrived. explain that one with some excuse please).

You can make all the excuses you want. In the end Walker reverted to his old self in the playoffs. He had his (second) shot and blew it. That's his fault and no one elses.



> and i know someone whos uncle is the dog groomer for danny ainges 2nd cousin...and he said that they r going to resign walker and not trade pierce


Funny guy. He really did see Gorman and talk to him and thought some people in here might find it interesting. 

Edit. No personal attacks. -aqua.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> and i know someone whos uncle is the dog groomer for danny ainges 2nd cousin...and he said that they r going to resign walker and not trade pierce


Oh well then, that puts an end to all speculation. If DA's second cousin's dog groomer says so, it must be so.



> you dont...its an assumption...how do u figure that if you give him a training camp, pre-season, and entire regular season that he wont learn how to play in docs scheme...


Walker's played the same way everywhere he went. Dallas fans: elated to see him gone. Atlanta fans: elated to see him gone. There's a reason for that. I just do not think Antoine Walker will settle for 12 shots a game or the like. He's never been able to do it before and I have huge doubts about him doing it again. 

You don't play within the system the whole time you're with a team and then just *poof* forget it or just suddenly be unable to function in it. That does not happen. Stop making excuses for him and just accept the fact that he reverted back to his old self, and it hurt us. And I think that will be the Antoine Walker we see next season. Maybe not right away, but as the season goes on, he'll be back. I think DA knows this and will send a lowball offer 'Toine's way, Antoine will reject, and that'll be that. He was right to trade Walker the first time.

And to the guy taking shots at PP's inability to play in the system at first - that point isn't all that relevant, because if Walker came in and was unable to play the way Doc wanted from the word go I would have a different stance on this. But the fact remains he came back, played whatever 30 games the way Doc wanted to, and come playoff time decides he doesn't need to anymore. Take shots at Pierce all you want, but even he was able to keep his ego in check and stay within the system.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> Edit. No personal attacks. -aqua.



ha ha ha im dying


im done posting on this topic how about we just wait until the season and we'll see whos right...im outtttttttttttttttttt

#1AWF


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

"Antoine played within the system the first 12 games he came back"

Fiction, Antoine didn't know **** about the system until at least 8 games into it. They slowly put him into it. You can't say that he "played well when he played in the system" if he didn't know anything about it, he was just playing basketball.

"We lost the series due to Antione"

Really? Well I suppose this was Antoine's fault too.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> You can't say that he "played well when he played in the system" if he didn't know anything about it, he was just playing basketball.


I'm almost certain Walker knew the system come playoff time. And if he didn't, and was just "playing basketball", like you say, it's still a strike against him because he played like a moron the whole series. Bad decision after bad decision...does he ever learn from his mistakes or ignore them?



> Really? Well I suppose this was Antoine's fault too.


I'm not a believer that we lost the series due to Antoine. It was due to the entire team, obviously. You can't pin blame squarely on one guy (whether it be Pierce, Antoine, Davis, etc.) because when you come down to it, they all had their edit moments in the series.

Here's the bottom line though. In the end, what we think doesn't matter. None of us are Danny Ainge. If Danny thinks bringing back Walker is what is best for the team, he'll do so, and if he does, I'll be pulling for Antoine to make me eat my words. I have confidence that DA will do what's best for the Celtics this offseason.

No masked cursing

-Premier


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> I'm almost certain Walker knew the system come playoff time. And if he didn't, and was just "playing basketball", like you say, it's still a strike against him because he played like a moron the whole series. Bad decision after bad decision...does he ever learn from his mistakes or ignore them?
> 
> 
> Really? Well I suppose this was Antoine's fault too.
> I'm not a believer that we lost the series due to Antoine. It was due to the entire team, obviously. You can't pin blame squarely on one guy (whether it be Pierce, Antoine, Davis, etc.) because when you come down to it, they all had their shtty moments in the series.


Fair enough. You can not pin it on one guy. Although I would have liked to have seen Doc sit Walker once it was obvious that Walker was going to launch at will. So while it was not one guys fault - Walker gets a nice hunk of the blame.



P-Dub34 said:


> Here's the bottom line though. In the end, what we think doesn't matter. None of us are Danny Ainge. If Danny thinks bringing back Walker is what is best for the team, he'll do so, and if he does, I'll be pulling for Antoine to make me eat my words. I have confidence that DA will do what's best for the Celtics this offseason.


It makes for good conversation though.

But I also have a lot of confidence in Ainge. It should be a very interesting offseason for the Celtics.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> Although I would have liked to have seen Doc sit Walker once it was obvious that Walker was going to launch at will.


Yeah, that would've been nice. Seriously, I do NOT understand how guys like Payton do not get in his ear about stuff like that.



> So while it was not one guys fault - Walker gets a nice hunk of the blame.


Agreed. But so does Ricky Davis - only showed up for half the series
So does Gary Payton - poor decision making, brutal shooting (although good D on Miller)
So does Paul Pierce - he was spectacular a couple of games but getting tossed in Game 6 was a bonehead play (Pierce still isn't even close to the goat he's made out to be)
So does Mark Blount - for being trash all year
So does Doc Rivers - for getting brutally outcoached by Rick Carlisle

Need I go on?

Antoine did pick us up in Game 6 - no denying that - but he also needed 25 shots to get to 25 points. Not one...1!!! FT attempt on 26 shots. Also worrisome is that Walker played just 6 more minutes than Pierce, managed to launch 14 more shots, and get a truly pathetic 4 more points. On 26 shots to Paul's 12, he managed 4 more points. Perfect example of one guy being in the system and limiting his shots (and still getting his points) to another who isn't and relies on being a volume scorer.


----------

