# So... still want Ben?



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

Game 3 of the ECF, and the dude barely even shows up with 2 points and 6 boards. What's even worse, shoots 2-10 on freebies, including some key ones in crunchtime. Pretty much the main reason why the Pistons are down 2-1 in the series right now, and he's been having an underwhelming playoffs to begin with. Dude is on the decline, it's becoming more and more clear, and he is most definitely not worth the kind of money he'll be demanding on the market. Let the someone else sign him, I do not want this guy on our team for the next 6 years.


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

Ben Wallace is worth every penny, its his defence that is not allowing shaq to dominate. Without Wallace the pistons will be lost, and there wont be one team not wanting to sign him. Pistons can easily win Game 4 and its a whole new series.


----------



## MonsterBosh (Feb 9, 2005)

You think Ben Wallace would consider coming to Toronto ... ???!!!! .... :laugh:


----------



## Team Mao (Dec 17, 2005)

Never wanted him in the first place. His max contract will be something that will be regretted within 2 seasons.


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

Ben Wallace would rather die then be on the raptors, they have no future, they need a bench before ppl start talking championships.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

The segment where he was talking about his achillis heel (making free throws) made me cringe. Its like he takes pride in not being able to hit free throws. I guess he feels that all great centers cant hit free throws or something. "Ben makes no excuses for his problem but he tries to change the game in a positive way when hes not at the free throw line." WTF. Just hit your free throws moron. Show some pride in your game. I ****ing hate his aww shucks attitude. This guy is a scrub. Then the commentator sings his praises (i cant stand this guy, not Hubie the other dude), hes such a great teamate, he does what it takes to win blah blah blah and then Hubie interjects, "but its 4 points and they foul him when he should be getting dunks. So far its cost them 8 points." *Ben Wallace is an overated star manufactured by the media. *Commentators and writers who dont understand the game mindlesly praise his D so they can appear "hardcore" or "old school" or like they are actually saying something important. Atleast Hubie keeps it real. I was just sitting down to start a thread similar to this one. 

Ben Wallace is an increadable defender and an increadable moron with a BAD attitude. Basketball is a 2 way sport.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

Pain5155 said:


> Ben Wallace would rather die then be on the raptors, they have no future, they need a bench before ppl start talking championships.


 I'm sure you've heard this expression before, but money talks. And the Raptors are one of the few teams in the league that will have cap space this summer. I just hope they don't foolishly spend it on Wallace.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

Pain5155 said:


> Ben Wallace is worth every penny, its his defence that is not allowing shaq to dominate. Without Wallace the pistons will be lost, and there wont be one team not wanting to sign him. Pistons can easily win Game 4 and its a whole new series.


Shaq is playing better in this series than he has all season. Can you say why you think his D is so great against shaq? Ben wallace excels at help D, not guarding a guy like shaq one on one.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

MonsterBosh said:


> You think Ben Wallace would consider coming to Toronto ... ???!!!! .... :laugh:



After this series he might.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

I kinda feel sorry for Ben cause he cant hit his free throws.

Amazing how an NBA player can miss sooooooo many free throws.


----------



## Divine Spammer (Jul 11, 2005)

I agree. 
He's declining and overratedm IMO.
Bruce Bowen should have won DPOY award.


----------



## Lope31 (Jun 11, 2002)

Before you get down on Ben Wallace, remember that he played a huge role in the Pistons Game 2 blowout*. Maybe not statistically, but Ben Wallace proved in that game that he can still play, what he does on the offensive glass is amazing, and his defence on Shaq wasn't too bad either.

Ben Wallace is the third, and sometimes fourth best player on our team, depending on Tayshaun Prince and ahead of Rasheed Wallace. He's hardly a max player, and it makes me vomit to watch my worst nightmare unfold: Pistons trade Darko Milicic because they are afraid of breaking up their core, when trading Sheed would have been perfectly feasible. A move done to free cap room so that this current team can have a few more seasons to try and win. Then after the trade is over and done with, the Pistons start showing their age. I don't want to lock up a team that hasn't played with heart since January. And in a failed attempt to secure a contender (we secured the team, not the contender) we gave up our future.

So, if you want Ben Wallace for max you're crazy. Unless he can get inspired somehow, he simply doesn't deserve it. The only reason the Pistons will even think about giving him big money is as a reward for all that he's done in the past. 

If Ben Wallace leaves the Pistons, I have a feeling the rest of the team will fall apart quickly, so do me (the Pistons fan) a favour and encourage Ben to sign with Detroit for cheap. I'll throw in Dale Davis for free.

*They even survived a 3 man Miami Heat powerplay in the fourth quarter. Bavetta sabotaged that game so bad that they should have called it after three quarters.


----------



## aizn (Jun 19, 2005)

remember, defense isn't always on the box score. if u watch the pistons game, he still hustles and tries to get the rebounds (he juss gets boxed out way 2 much). if we added ben wallace it would surely fix our interior defensive problems. mayb our coaches can work on his free throw shooting (helped bosh become so much better). i wouldn't mind a ben wallace, as long as its below 10 mill/season and not a lengthy contract.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

aizn said:


> *remember, defense isn't always on the box score.* if u watch the pistons game, he still hustles and tries to get the rebounds (he juss gets boxed out way 2 much). if we added ben wallace it would surely fix our interior defensive problems. mayb our coaches can work on his free throw shooting (helped bosh become so much better). i wouldn't mind a ben wallace, as long as its below 10 mill/season and not a lengthy contract.


things on offense arent always on the box score either, like being left unguarded at the 3 point line and the other team knowing they can just foul you to save 2 points.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

this team could use Ben Wallace in a HUGE way. Do you guys remember the few game right when AD got traded back here and he actually played with some heart, we played amazing in those games. Why? B/c we had an imposing force in the middle who held it down and gave teams problems in the paint and AD just brought GRIT and POWER to this team. Are you telling me that Ben Wallace EVEN at 34 wont be better then that AD we saw? He will be exponentially better then that. So yes Wallace will be worth every penney that we give him.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

adhir1 said:


> this team could use Ben Wallace in a HUGE way. Do you guys remember the few game right when AD got traded back here and he actually played with some heart, we played amazing in those games. Why? B/c we had an imposing force in the middle who held it down and gave teams problems in the paint and AD just brought GRIT and POWER to this team. Are you telling me that Ben Wallace EVEN at 34 wont be better then that AD we saw? He will be exponentially better then that. So yes Wallace will be worth every penney that we give him.


 He won't be worth every penny if every penny we're giving him is crippling our franchise and preventing us from making our team better! There's no way the dude will come for less than the max or damn near it, with the money he'll be commanding. I know he's not a guy you can just measure by stats, but when he was in his prime, at least he was putting up those stats anyway! The entire playoffs he's been pretty much a non-factor, and the team's focus has gone from him to the backcourt with Rip and Chauncey all season long. He is just not the kind of dude we should be putting a long-term investment in. He's only going to get worse.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> He won't be worth every penny if every penny we're giving him is crippling our franchise and preventing us from making our team better! There's no way the dude will come for less than the max or damn near it, with the money he'll be commanding. I know he's not a guy you can just measure by stats, but when he was in his prime, at least he was putting up those stats anyway! The entire playoffs he's been pretty much a non-factor, and the team's focus has gone from him to the backcourt with Rip and Chauncey all season long. He is just not the kind of dude we should be putting a long-term investment in. He's only going to get worse.


well on Offense Rip and Chauncey were always the main focuses. everybody knows that. and Neither, well maybe chauncey, can hold it down on defense as well as Ben. The pistons are still winning games based on their defense, and who is the anchor of that Defense, its Ben wallace. and to tell you the truth, which player is truly worth the 16-17 million dollars plus they are receiving at the end of their deals? Vince isnt worth it, Tmac wont be worth it, Kobe while probably still putting up amazing stats, cant lead his team to a victory in a playoff seriers right now, will damn well not be worth the 24 million he will be recieving at the end of his deal. ITs the nature of the business you have to pay these guys if you want them. and all their deals end up being with 10% raises every year, so there is really nt much tot he argument, is he gonna be worth X money, b/c he is but we can always trade him for massive cap realease and then go after the next big thing that the yar of cap realease is offering.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

How are we going to trade him? Realize how much his value has dropped already, imagine how much more it'll drop by the end of next year, let alone by the end of his contract. You don't sign players to ridiculous contracts just so they can help out a little bit for one or two years, and then plan on trading them for cap relief as they get old and really start stinking it up. We're not looking for quick fixes, and Ben is just a very expensive quick fix. He won't be winning us championships if we're looking to deal him for cap relief nearing the end of his career! How many contenders do you see that are trying to rid themselves of heavy contracts for cap relief? That's what we've just finished doing to help build a contender, not the other way around.

If you're happy with quick fixes and then trying to sell off our lame contracts for cap space, then Wallace is your man... but I don't want to be contemplating how to get rid of his fat contract in 5 years, I want to have players that actually produce, both on the stat sheet and on the court.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> How are we going to trade him? Realize how much his value has dropped already, imagine how much more it'll drop by the end of next year, let alone by the end of his contract. You don't sign players to ridiculous contracts just so they can help out a little bit for one or two years, and then plan on trading them for cap relief as they get old and really start stinking it up. We're not looking for quick fixes, and Ben is just a very expensive quick fix. He won't be winning us championships if we're looking to deal him for cap relief nearing the end of his career! How many contenders do you see that are trying to rid themselves of heavy contracts for cap relief? That's what we've just finished doing to help build a contender, not the other way around.
> 
> If you're happy with quick fixes and then trying to sell off our lame contracts for cap space, then Wallace is your man... but I don't want to be contemplating how to get rid of his fat contract in 5 years, I want to have players that actually produce, both on the stat sheet and on the court.


ummm yess you do....every GM knows that AGE is a huge factor, and by the 4 or fifth year are starting to look at offers to trade that player, its called planning ahead. and obviously people arent going to take Ben Wallace for Ben Wallace they are going to take him for the 16 million dollars in cap space that he is going to giv them in the offseason. and then you can 1. get a great player in return or you can get a pick from a rebulding team. and you start the process over. and I seriously doubt that Ben will be decrease so much that he will be a total scrub that sits on the end of your bench, he will be in their providing great if not amazing man on man defense (which goes wayyyyy further then the boxscore) and he will be boxing out and grabbing rebounds. and with his work ethic i would not be surprised if he is still blocking 2-3 shots a game. you seem to think that after 2-3 years wallace will become a penny hardaway or someone who is a total non factor. while his work ethic and total desire to win completely tell me he will be one of the most reliable players on your team, even if he gets older.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

adhir1 said:


> ummm yess you do....every GM knows that AGE is a huge factor, and by the 4 or fifth year are starting to look at offers to trade that player, its called planning ahead. and obviously people arent going to take Ben Wallace for Ben Wallace they are going to take him for the 16 million dollars in cap space that he is going to giv them in the offseason. and then you can 1. get a great player in return or you can get a pick from a rebulding team. and you start the process over. and I seriously doubt that Ben will be decrease so much that he will be a total scrub that sits on the end of your bench, he will be in their providing great if not amazing man on man defense (which goes wayyyyy further then the boxscore) and he will be boxing out and grabbing rebounds. and with his work ethic i would not be surprised if he is still blocking 2-3 shots a game. you seem to think that after 2-3 years wallace will become a penny hardaway or someone who is a total non factor. while his work ethic and total desire to win completely tell me he will be one of the most reliable players on your team, even if he gets older.


 You know what all this is called? Signing a player only to hopefully replace him somehow with a younger dude later on? That's rebuilding. And the other thing - adding old players who only have a couple years left in them to help out, that's a band-aid fix. The former is a phase we're just trying to get out of, and move into the building phase. The latter is a phase we're all too familiar with from the Vince Carter era. Signing guys like Hakeem, AD, JYD... of course Ben is on another level from those guys, but in the long run his contract will do the same damage. How easy was it to get young players from Hakeem, AD, JYD, and Alvin? You think it's gonna be any different with Ben's contract?

Simply put, with the guy's price tag he is NOT the direction we should be going in. It's just deja vu all over again, and he won't make us a contender by the time our young'ns are ready to hit their primes, he'll just be deadweight.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> You know what all this is called? Signing a player only to hopefully replace him somehow with a younger dude later on? That's rebuilding. And the other thing - adding old players who only have a couple years left in them to help out, that's a band-aid fix. The former is a phase we're just trying to get out of, and move into the building phase. The latter is a phase we're all too familiar with from the Vince Carter era. Signing guys like Hakeem, AD, JYD... of course Ben is on another level from those guys, but in the long run his contract will do the same damage. How easy was it to get young players from Hakeem, AD, JYD, and Alvin? You think it's gonna be any different with Ben's contract?
> 
> Simply put, with the guy's price tag he is NOT the direction we should be going in. It's just deja vu all over again, and he won't make us a contender by the time our young'ns are ready to hit their primes, he'll just be deadweight.


ok well the whole flaw with ur argument is that you named 4 players, we 4 contracts that were/are bad ill give you that, but its obviously much harder to get rid of 4 guys rather then 1 bad contract in Ben. and how is looking to change an older guy for a younger guy rebulding? If our teams is already amazing, replacing Ben for a younger atheletic big is just subsituting, not rebuilding for the simple fact that our core group of player will be what 26-27 at that time.and Wallace wont be our franchise player, Bosh will be, its called as i said looking forward and making sure ur team stay on par and doesnt need to go through rebulding. and it makes more sense to have a bunch of players in the thick of their prime with one vet on the court to help them out in Wallace, and you said it urself he is not on the same level of those guys, so your telling me if you had Shaq willing to sign to ur team for another 5 year at 14 per you wouldnt do it? The simple fact of having a Ben Wallace (defensive intensity) or Shaq (raw power/muscle/size) will alter games, somethign that even with age will never end in their games, makes no sense. and Ben wallace is 31 if we give him a 5 year contract he will be 36, hardly very old for a Big Man with a rock hard work ethic.


----------



## Team Mao (Dec 17, 2005)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> You know what all this is called? Signing a player only to hopefully replace him somehow with a younger dude later on? That's rebuilding. And the other thing - adding old players who only have a couple years left in them to help out, that's a band-aid fix. The former is a phase we're just trying to get out of, and move into the building phase. The latter is a phase we're all too familiar with from the Vince Carter era. Signing guys like Hakeem, AD, JYD... of course Ben is on another level from those guys, but in the long run his contract will do the same damage. How easy was it to get young players from Hakeem, AD, JYD, and Alvin? You think it's gonna be any different with Ben's contract?
> 
> Simply put, with the guy's price tag he is NOT the direction we should be going in. It's just deja vu all over again, and he won't make us a contender by the time our young'ns are ready to hit their primes, he'll just be deadweight.


Amen brother. Couldn't have said it better.


----------



## pmac34 (Feb 10, 2006)

no i dont


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

adhir1 said:


> ok well the whole flaw with ur argument is that you named 4 players, we 4 contracts that were/are bad ill give you that, but its obviously much harder to get rid of 4 guys rather then 1 bad contract in Ben. and how is looking to change an older guy for a younger guy rebulding? If our teams is already amazing, replacing Ben for a younger atheletic big is just subsituting, not rebuilding for the simple fact that our core group of player will be what 26-27 at that time.and Wallace wont be our franchise player, Bosh will be, its called as i said looking forward and making sure ur team stay on par and doesnt need to go through rebulding. and it makes more sense to have a bunch of players in the thick of their prime with one vet on the court to help them out in Wallace, and you said it urself he is not on the same level of those guys, so your telling me if you had Shaq willing to sign to ur team for another 5 year at 14 per you wouldnt do it? The simple fact of having a Ben Wallace (defensive intensity) or Shaq (raw power/muscle/size) will alter games, somethign that even with age will never end in their games, makes no sense. and Ben wallace is 31 if we give him a 5 year contract he will be 36, hardly very old for a Big Man with a rock hard work ethic.


 But why would you even want to have that one bad contract? What do we gain from this one bad contract? A chance to dump it, wow! What's more, and this is something that I haven't even touched upon because the sheer contract status is so ridiculous, is that he'd be taking minutes away from our youngn's. You want a player to teach them the ropes, that's what coaches are for. Ben's minutes will be well earned his first year with the Raps, but after that he'd just be hurting the team, both on and off the court, and I'm not talking about free throws now. You're infatuated with his work ethic and rebounding ability, but we can get the same thing from hiring Charles Oakley as a big man coach (just throwing a random name out there). It's just stupid, whether from a team finance view, team building view, or team chemistry view, to tie ourselves down with a massive contract to an old, declining player just because he rebounds and works hard.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> But why would you even want to have that one bad contract? What do we gain from this one bad contract? A chance to dump it, wow! What's more, and this is something that I haven't even touched upon because the sheer contract status is so ridiculous, is that he'd be taking minutes away from our youngn's. You want a player to teach them the ropes, that's what coaches are for. Ben's minutes will be well earned his first year with the Raps, but after that he'd just be hurting the team, both on and off the court, and I'm not talking about free throws now. You're infatuated with his work ethic and rebounding ability, but we can get the same thing from hiring Charles Oakley as a big man coach (just throwing a random name out there). It's just stupid, whether from a team finance view, team building view, or team chemistry view, to tie ourselves down with a massive contract to an old, declining player just because he rebounds and works hard.


im not sayign you have to have that one bad contract, what im sayign is that you have to pay players to get them to play here, more often then not the finals years of their deals the player aer not worth it, thats why teams want to get the young superstars fresh out of college, but unfortunately greg Oden isnt available. So u need to shell out the cash to get Big Ben here. eluding to me other post, if Jason Kidd worth the 15 mill he is making right now? is Vince worth his money? Hey, some peopel have even said Shaq, the man who will guarentee you a trip to the conference finals and make a you a contender isnt even worth the money he is making. As for hiring a big man coach sure that would be great, but why not pay a player that will give you both the on court AND off court teachings and be a valuable asset to our youngin' and you said hed be takign minutes away from our youngin's which on of our "up and coming" youth C's actually deserve the minutes? Sow, ummm no not instead of Ben, Araujo? please, Bonner...i dont think so. You keep sayign age age age, but what Be brings to a team goes soo much further then his atheletic ability, he has the the fundamentals of playing defense down, and that is somethign that doesnt go away, even with age. the same goes for work ethic. Karl Malone brought his A game until the day he signed with the Lakers, and took on a smaller role..why? B/c he had the fundamentals down pat, and that went soo far from his atheletic abilty.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

adhir1 said:


> im not sayign you have to have that one bad contract, what im sayign is that you have to pay players to get them to play here, more often then not the finals years of their deals the player aer not worth it, thats why teams want to get the young superstars fresh out of college, but unfortunately greg Oden isnt available. So u need to shell out the cash to get Big Ben here. eluding to me other post, if Jason Kidd worth the 15 mill he is making right now? is Vince worth his money? Hey, some peopel have even said Shaq, the man who will guarentee you a trip to the conference finals and make a you a contender isnt even worth the money he is making. As for hiring a big man coach sure that would be great, but why not pay a player that will give you both the on court AND off court teachings and be a valuable asset to our youngin' and you said hed be takign minutes away from our youngin's which on of our "up and coming" youth C's actually deserve the minutes? Sow, ummm no not instead of Ben, Araujo? please, Bonner...i dont think so. You keep sayign age age age, but what Be brings to a team goes soo much further then his atheletic ability, he has the the fundamentals of playing defense down, and that is somethign that doesnt go away, even with age. the same goes for work ethic. Karl Malone brought his A game until the day he signed with the Lakers, and took on a smaller role..why? B/c he had the fundamentals down pat, and that went soo far from his atheletic abilty.


 He'd be taking away from Bosh, Villy, and if we draft a big man, him too. That's who I was talking about, the guys actually logging the big minutes, our real future, not scrubs like Sow and Hoffa. If we don't draft big, then instead of Ben there's Nazr, Nene, and Pryzbilla on the market - none of which are nearly as good as Ben, but all of which will come at a significantly smaller price tag and the last two of which are significantly younger. Those are the type of guys - age wise - this team needs. It sucks that we couldn't get a star free agent at a younger age now, but that's life. Any one of those three, probably mostly Pryz, would be a better option than Ben even though they don't have as much talent right now. But as far as investments go, that's about as smart as it gets for the free agent crop this summer.

Also, do you really believe that Wallace will be playing at pretty much this same level until his late 30's like Malone did? That season with the Lakers was his first big drop-off, and Wallace is already showing flashes of a big drop-off, right now in front of our eyes. That's not quite the same thing. On top of that, Malone got the MLE, but we'd be paying around $12-15 mill for Wallace to be having that kind of impact on our team. That's just a waste of money.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

adhir1 said:


> im not sayign you have to have that one bad contract, what im sayign is that you have to pay players to get them to play here, more often then not the finals years of their deals the player aer not worth it, thats why teams want to get the young superstars fresh out of college, but unfortunately greg Oden isnt available. So u need to shell out the cash to get Big Ben here. eluding to me other post, if Jason Kidd worth the 15 mill he is making right now? is Vince worth his money? Hey, some peopel have even said Shaq, the man who will guarentee you a trip to the conference finals and make a you a contender isnt even worth the money he is making. As for hiring a big man coach sure that would be great, but why not pay a player that will give you both the on court AND off court teachings and be a valuable asset to our youngin' and you said hed be takign minutes away from our youngin's which on of our "up and coming" youth C's actually deserve the minutes? Sow, ummm no not instead of Ben, Araujo? please, Bonner...i dont think so. You keep sayign age age age, but what Be brings to a team goes soo much further then his atheletic ability, he has the the fundamentals of playing defense down, and that is somethign that doesnt go away, even with age. the same goes for work ethic. *Karl Malone brought his A game until the day he signed with the Lakers, and took on a smaller role..why? B/c he had the fundamentals down pat, and that went soo far from his atheletic abilty.*


Malone SUCKED when he was with the lakers. It was a dumb move for the lakers to sign him, for the vet min, and you want the raptors to sign ben wallace to a max contract, so he can teach chris bosh fundamentals? :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> He'd be taking away from Bosh, Villy, and if we draft a big man, him too. That's who I was talking about, the guys actually logging the big minutes, our real future, not scrubs like Sow and Hoffa. If we don't draft big, then instead of Ben there's Nazr, Nene, and Pryzbilla on the market - none of which are nearly as good as Ben, but all of which will come at a significantly smaller price tag and the last two of which are significantly younger. Those are the type of guys - age wise - this team needs. It sucks that we couldn't get a star free agent at a younger age now, but that's life. Any one of those three, probably mostly Pryz, would be a better option than Ben even though they don't have as much talent right now. But as far as investments go, that's about as smart as it gets for the free agent crop this summer.
> 
> Also, do you really believe that Wallace will be playing at pretty much this same level until his late 30's like Malone did? That season with the Lakers was his first big drop-off, and Wallace is already showing flashes of a big drop-off, right now in front of our eyes. That's not quite the same thing. On top of that, Malone got the MLE, but we'd be paying around $12-15 mill for Wallace to be having that kind of impact on our team. That's just a waste of money.



taking away what exactly from Bosh and VIlly??? Minutes? aahh no he plays center Villy and Bosh play the 3,4 respectfully. Touches? I doubt it? he cant play offense, but then again which one of our centers can? He isnt really taking away anything from Bosh and villy. Umm you want Pryz? Someone who isnt getting minutes on a team with no great center except Ratliff who is far past his best days. and a team that is probably more of a mess then we are in. Nazr? He was traded 3 times in his career, he has no intensity he cant even crack the rotation in SA, given they are a preety good team, but honestly starting Horry over him, or Nesterovic, we want to change the identity of this team, not making them more of a slouch that Nazr is, he brings no itensity, no desire or passion to win. And this team is young and inexeperiends as it is, why do you want to get younger? You need vets to get you through, you need that one guy to be there and done that. 

and man are you putting alot of merit in one playoff year, need i remind you that Ben Wallace just won another DPOY, you cannot say that he is dropping off after one playoff series. He Locked down Ilgauskas in the series vs Cleveland, and the Milwaukee centers were no where tobe seen against Milwaukee. and well nobody can stop shaq, but if i had to bet my money on anybody it would be Wallace, he did it last year and is mamking it awfully hard for Shaq this year.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

Unfortuntely he is too old for a real Max deal.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

adhir1 said:


> taking away what exactly from Bosh and VIlly??? Minutes? aahh no he plays center Villy and Bosh play the 3,4 respectfully. Touches? I doubt it? he cant play offense, but then again which one of our centers can? He isnt really taking away anything from Bosh and villy. Umm you want Pryz? Someone who isnt getting minutes on a team with no great center except Ratliff who is far past his best days. and a team that is probably more of a mess then we are in. Nazr? He was traded 3 times in his career, he has no intensity he cant even crack the rotation in SA, given they are a preety good team, but honestly starting Horry over him, or Nesterovic, we want to change the identity of this team, not making them more of a slouch that Nazr is, he brings no itensity, no desire or passion to win. And this team is young and inexeperiends as it is, why do you want to get younger? You need vets to get you through, you need that one guy to be there and done that.
> 
> and man are you putting alot of merit in one playoff year, need i remind you that Ben Wallace just won another DPOY, you cannot say that he is dropping off after one playoff series. He Locked down Ilgauskas in the series vs Cleveland, and the Milwaukee centers were no where tobe seen against Milwaukee. and well nobody can stop shaq, but if i had to bet my money on anybody it would be Wallace, he did it last year and is mamking it awfully hard for Shaq this year.


 ****, I had a longer response to this but it got erased... I'll just outline what I said.

CV/Bosh play the 4-5, along with the 3. Throw in a drafted big man into the equasion, that's not a lot of minutes left. So yes Ben would be cutting into their minutes, and subsequently, their touches. You also didn't say a single thing about Pryzbilla's game, whose defense and shotblocking ability fit our team very nicely. The biggest knock about Nazr is his inconsistency really, the fact that he's been traded three times is irrelevant - look how many times Wallace himself has moved teams. It's all about finding a fit. Detroit is Wallace's fit, will it be the same in Toronto? Just because he's a hard working big man doens't mean we should cripple our team's future by signing him to a big long term contract.

He's not even holding Shaq back that much, either. Shaq's actually having a better series against the Pistons than he was against the Nets, and is doing about the same he was against the Bulls do. I don't consider that giving him a harder time. I'm also less focused on his postseason this year, but moreso how it relates to his decline as a player overall. Imagine how much worse he'll be next year too. Anyway, you say he'll change the identity of our team? The identity of our franchise as it is right now, is one that keeps switching between being capped out by useless contracts and rebuilding. Signing Ben would do just that to our team, again. It's just not worth it, not for a couple good seasons, if that.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> ****, I had a longer response to this but it got erased... I'll just outline what I said.
> 
> CV/Bosh play the 4-5, along with the 3. Throw in a drafted big man into the equasion, that's not a lot of minutes left. So yes Ben would be cutting into their minutes, and subsequently, their touches. You also didn't say a single thing about Pryzbilla's game, whose defense and shotblocking ability fit our team very nicely. The biggest knock about Nazr is his inconsistency really, the fact that he's been traded three times is irrelevant - look how many times Wallace himself has moved teams. It's all about finding a fit. Detroit is Wallace's fit, will it be the same in Toronto? Just because he's a hard working big man doens't mean we should cripple our team's future by signing him to a big long term contract.
> 
> He's not even holding Shaq back that much, either. Shaq's actually having a better series against the Pistons than he was against the Nets, and is doing about the same he was against the Bulls do. I don't consider that giving him a harder time. I'm also less focused on his postseason this year, but moreso how it relates to his decline as a player overall. Imagine how much worse he'll be next year too. Anyway, you say he'll change the identity of our team? The identity of our franchise as it is right now, is one that keeps switching between being capped out by useless contracts and rebuilding. Signing Ben would do just that to our team, again. It's just not worth it, not for a couple good seasons, if that.


ummm i still dont understand how he will be taking away from Bosh/CV and they dont play the 4/5 they play the 3/4 for 90% of the game, maybe for like 5 mins a game adn that is purely b/c of the fact that our other options are VERY limited. Even after Bosh got injured, CV played the 3 for the better part of the game, he never started at the 4, or even played their for extended minutes. If we signed Wallace, it would mean that Hoffa/Sow/Bonner's minutes would be cut, Bosh/CV would still be getting their 35-40 mins a game. and Ben absolutely sucks at offense....maybe a tad bit better then Hoffa/SOw, so again how will it take "touches" away from Bosh/CV when they will most likely be our 1 and 2 options on the floor at a given time, and wallace will msot likely be the 5th and have zero plays runfor him. and sure Pryzbilla's defense is good..but its not Ben Wallace good. Its not game changing good. 

Nazr being moved is very very relevant. Why wouldnt he have gotten locked up in this league, were big man get huge stupid contracts liek Brian Cardinal and ADONAL FREAKING FOYLE??? There is somethign there that neither of us see, and im betting that it aint a good thing. i mena he got traded from New York for Malik Rose, and now the spurs dont even want to resign him? You have to question his character at this point.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

adhir1 said:


> ummm i still dont understand how he will be taking away from Bosh/CV and they dont play the 4/5 they play the 3/4 for 90% of the game, maybe for like 5 mins a game adn that is purely b/c of the fact that our other options are VERY limited. Even after Bosh got injured, CV played the 3 for the better part of the game, he never started at the 4, or even played their for extended minutes. If we signed Wallace, it would mean that Hoffa/Sow/Bonner's minutes would be cut, Bosh/CV would still be getting their 35-40 mins a game. and Ben absolutely sucks at offense....maybe a tad bit better then Hoffa/SOw, so again how will it take "touches" away from Bosh/CV when they will most likely be our 1 and 2 options on the floor at a given time, and wallace will msot likely be the 5th and have zero plays runfor him. and sure Pryzbilla's defense is good..but its not Ben Wallace good. Its not game changing good.
> 
> Nazr being moved is very very relevant. Why wouldnt he have gotten locked up in this league, were big man get huge stupid contracts liek Brian Cardinal and ADONAL FREAKING FOYLE??? There is somethign there that neither of us see, and im betting that it aint a good thing. i mena he got traded from New York for Malik Rose, and now the spurs dont even want to resign him? You have to question his character at this point.


 This is getting pointless. Like I've said before, they DO play the 4/5 the majority of the time, yes Bonner and Sow and Hoffa get a few minutes a game, but Bosh and CV are the main guys, throw in Bargnani or Aldridge, those minutes get even tighter. If Wallace takes away minutes, they also lose touches because they're playing less minutes - that's how they get less touches.

You still aren't giving me any reason why Ben's a good fit for our team, INCLUDING contract and INCLUDING what he's going to be doing at the end of said contract. Yeah Pryz isn't as good a rebounder, that's a given, but he's also a better investment, that's the point! It's about getting quality players WITHOUT shooting ourselves in the foot. Is it too hard to get? Anyway, if you wanna carry this on, I'll go along with it, but I don't see anything different coming in support of Ben, and I keep stressing what I've been saying from the beginning too.


----------



## Ballyhoo (May 30, 2003)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> Yeah Pryz isn't as good a rebounder, that's a given, but he's also a better investment, that's the point! It's about getting quality players WITHOUT shooting ourselves in the foot. Is it too hard to get?


Totally agree, except for the part about Pryz being a better investment. That depends on what he signs for. If the Raptors throw $60 million at him it would be awful. I used to be on the Ben bandwagon, but I'm jumping off. Right now I'd rather not overpay for anyone, and draft Aldridge and see what he can do. If Detroit pays Ben big bucks, then maybe we can make a run at Billups next year to solve the PG problem.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

Ballyhoo said:


> If Detroit pays Ben big bucks, then maybe we can make a run at Billups next year to solve the PG problem.


That's very true, I never thought about that. If Ford and Hinrich get locked up, I'd love to have Billups on our team.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> This is getting pointless. Like I've said before, they DO play the 4/5 the majority of the time, yes Bonner and Sow and Hoffa get a few minutes a game, but Bosh and CV are the main guys, throw in Bargnani or Aldridge, those minutes get even tighter. If Wallace takes away minutes, they also lose touches because they're playing less minutes - that's how they get less touches.
> 
> You still aren't giving me any reason why Ben's a good fit for our team, INCLUDING contract and INCLUDING what he's going to be doing at the end of said contract. Yeah Pryz isn't as good a rebounder, that's a given, but he's also a better investment, that's the point! It's about getting quality players WITHOUT shooting ourselves in the foot. Is it too hard to get? Anyway, if you wanna carry this on, I'll go along with it, but I don't see anything different coming in support of Ben, and I keep stressing what I've been saying from the beginning too.


when did you see Charlie/Bosh/Mopete/Joey on the court at the same time? which could only happen if Bosh and CV were playing the 4/5, seeing as past Joey and MoPete our options at 3 were also limited. for that matter when did you see MoPete/Joeyon teh floor ever together? Barely ever and they are our only options who played the 2/3 other then charlie. Charlie and Bosh DID NOT play the 4/5 for a very long time in our games, i dunno if you were watching the same games as i was, maybe someone else can correct us? 

and whats our biggest problem on this team? 9out of 10 people will tell you its defense. and Ben is the best one of the best defensive if not best player in the league. and he will give you all that WITHOUT NEEDING THE BALL ON OFFENSE. so we would still have the same dynamic offense as last year, but wiht a FAR FAR superior defensive player who does not take away from our main offensive weapons. HOW DOES THAT NOT FIT OUR TEAM? he will play great defense and not screw up our offense liek some other defensive specialist in the league ala Artest who also commands the ball on the offensive end. i dont see how you dont see that.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> That's very true, I never thought about that. If Ford and Hinrich get locked up, I'd love to have Billups on our team.


Billups said he would never play in Canada ever again after he left our team the fist time...and ridiculed the franchise....and Billups is also 30 and would want a big contract, and seeing ur logic with Ben, you should be the first too say NO to Billups....


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

adhir1 said:


> Billups said he would never play in Canada ever again after he left our team the fist time...and ridiculed the franchise....and Billups is also 30 and would want a big contract, and seeing ur logic with Ben, you should be the first too say NO to Billups....


 The difference between Billups and Wallace is where they're at in their careers. Billups, like Nash, had a slow start in the NBA his first few years, and only really elevated his game to the player he is now two years ago when the Pistons won the championship. Obviously this year has been the best one of his career. So he's not on the downswing of his career just yet, and point guards generally last longer at a high level than big men - look at Cassell, Kidd (and he's had a lot of injuries too) for example. They're still capable of running a team. Talk about a position where you don't rely on your athleticism, point guard is just that.

If we sign Chauncey, first off it wouldn't cost as much as Ben, and secondly we'd get much more production out of him over the course of his contract. They're different positions and different situations.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> The difference between Billups and Wallace is where they're at in their careers. Billups, like Nash, had a slow start in the NBA his first few years, and only really elevated his game to the player he is now two years ago when the Pistons won the championship. Obviously this year has been the best one of his career. So he's not on the downswing of his career just yet, and point guards generally last longer at a high level than big men - look at Cassell, Kidd (and he's had a lot of injuries too) for example. They're still capable of running a team. Talk about a position where you don't rely on your athleticism, point guard is just that.
> 
> If we sign Chauncey, first off it wouldn't cost as much as Ben, and secondly we'd get much more production out of him over the course of his contract. They're different positions and different situations.


i dint no a players biological clock relies on when they had a "breakout" season, and i have to ask, how did Ben show sign of REGRESSING?? He just won a DPOY award? You still have to answer that, and ok so he is having a "not so Ben Wallace" playoffs this year, but his numbers arent that bad, i dont htink these are ground to call him in the twilight on his career. and PG doesnt relly on athleticism? I thought a PG's most important skill was his speed? and thats the same with Billups he is fast and big, and as time goes by wont this also decrease? Now i am one for signing Billups, but you shold be, ur just contradicting yourself, and do u think anybody would be willing to Casell 8-10 million a year this year? NO, Financially speaking end the end of their repective contracts BIllups and Wallace will be in the same situation, high overpaid players. and so u should not want either of them. Both of them will regress, but will give an asset in a big expiring contract. And you said billiups will come cheap? how do u figure? Wallace will get his max, R Wallace got a big extension 10 million, Tayshaun and Rip both got big 10 million dollar exensions, what makes you think Billups wont also command the max he is arguable their best player, as i said before if you want these players your going to have to pay them big money, which in the twilight of their careers will not be worth it, its the nature of the NBA this year.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

adhir1 said:


> when did you see Charlie/Bosh/Mopete/Joey on the court at the same time? which could only happen if Bosh and CV were playing the 4/5, seeing as past Joey and MoPete our options at 3 were also limited. for that matter when did you see MoPete/Joeyon teh floor ever together? Barely ever and they are our only options who played the 2/3 other then charlie. Charlie and Bosh DID NOT play the 4/5 for a very long time in our games, i dunno if you were watching the same games as i was, maybe someone else can correct us?
> 
> and whats our biggest problem on this team? 9out of 10 people will tell you its defense. and Ben is the best one of the best defensive if not best player in the league. and he will give you all that WITHOUT NEEDING THE BALL ON OFFENSE. so we would still have the same dynamic offense as last year, but wiht a FAR FAR superior defensive player who does not take away from our main offensive weapons. HOW DOES THAT NOT FIT OUR TEAM? he will play great defense and not screw up our offense liek some other defensive specialist in the league ala Artest who also commands the ball on the offensive end. i dont see how you dont see that.


 I do see that. I also see how Ben's impact on the team is only going to last for one or two seasons, if that. Contract wise and play wise, he DOES NOT FIT OUR PLANS. If you want toughness and agressiveness, Mike Tyson fits our team perfectly, but you don't see us running out to get him! Age and contract status are the two things I'm pushing here, which also happen to be the two things you conveniently ignore each time you make a post. I've given you many different dimensions as to why the Wallace signing would be bad for our team, but the only thing you have to say to that is that he'd be a good temporary fit. If anything, you're the one having trouble grasping my point of view here.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

adhir1 said:


> i dint no a players biological clock relies on when they had a "breakout" season, and i have to ask, how did Ben show sign of REGRESSING?? He just won a DPOY award? You still have to answer that, and ok so he is having a "not so Ben Wallace" playoffs this year, but his numbers arent that bad, i dont htink these are ground to call him in the twilight on his career. and PG doesnt relly on athleticism? I thought a PG's most important skill was his speed? and thats the same with Billups he is fast and big, and as time goes by wont this also decrease? Now i am one for signing Billups, but you shold be, ur just contradicting yourself, and do u think anybody would be willing to Casell 8-10 million a year this year? NO, Financially speaking end the end of their repective contracts BIllups and Wallace will be in the same situation, high overpaid players. and so u should not want either of them. Both of them will regress, but will give an asset in a big expiring contract. And you said billiups will come cheap? how do u figure? Wallace will get his max, R Wallace got a big extension 10 million, Tayshaun and Rip both got big 10 million dollar exensions, what makes you think Billups wont also command the max he is arguable their best player, as i said before if you want these players your going to have to pay them big money, which in the twilight of their careers will not be worth it, its the nature of the NBA this year.


 A point guard's most important asset is his speed? Tell that to Cassell, Nash, Kidd - hell, why do you think Iverson moved from the 2 back to point guard? A guy like Billups who has his fundamentals down won't doesn't rely on speed primarily, and that's a trait that will carry on until his late 30's. And if nothing else, history should attest to this.

As for Wallace, I have stated numerous times how he is regressing, but I'll go over them again. First of all, his regular season numbers have been on a steady decline since the 03-04 season, the year after he won his 2nd DPoY award. His rebounding numbers have gone 15.4-12.4-12.2-11.3. Second, his playoff numbers are not just "not so Ben Wallace" this year - they suck. Barely even averaging 10 rebounds a game over a series? Dude used to drop 20 points, 20 rebounds regularily in the playoffs, and you think he's not on a decline? Anyway, finally it's not hard to see that the entire team's shift from being his team to Chauncey's team. Obviously Rip and Chauncey have taken care of the bulk of their scoring load for years now, but during their championship run this was clearly Ben's team. Without him they wouldn't be there. Now he's more of a liability. Taking all of that into consideration, imagine how much of his numbers will drop next year, and the year after that. Maybe you're happy with paying a guy over $10 million to average 4 points and 5 rebounds (you seemed to love AD's performance on the Raps), but to me, it's a big waste of money, especially when that money could be spent on actually improving the team instead of trying to shop Ben to someone who needs an expiring contract (read: REBUILDING!!!).

On the other hand, you have Chauncey, who's improved his numbers every year since 2000 and has hit his prime this year with 18 & 9. Now next year, if we see a significant drop in his play both on the stat sheet and off the court, I'd be a lot more weary when it comes to giving him a contract. And speaking of which, you said it yourself. They'll have all this money tied down to the other four guys, that makes it all the tougher to give Billups that fat contract. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that Billups will come a lot cheaper next year than Ben will come this year, so that throws that one pretty much out the window. Like I said though, I'd rather have Ford or Hinrich, but they'll likely get resigned and are RFA's to begin with.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> A point guard's most important asset is his speed? Tell that to Cassell, Nash, Kidd - hell, why do you think Iverson moved from the 2 back to point guard? A guy like Billups who has his fundamentals down won't doesn't rely on speed primarily, and that's a trait that will carry on until his late 30's. And if nothing else, history should attest to this.
> 
> As for Wallace, I have stated numerous times how he is regressing, but I'll go over them again. First of all, his regular season numbers have been on a steady decline since the 03-04 season, the year after he won his 2nd DPoY award. His rebounding numbers have gone 15.4-12.4-12.2-11.3. Second, his playoff numbers are not just "not so Ben Wallace" this year - they suck. Barely even averaging 10 rebounds a game over a series? Dude used to drop 20 points, 20 rebounds regularily in the playoffs, and you think he's not on a decline? Anyway, finally it's not hard to see that the entire team's shift from being his team to Chauncey's team. Obviously Rip and Chauncey have taken care of the bulk of their scoring load for years now, but during their championship run this was clearly Ben's team. Without him they wouldn't be there. Now he's more of a liability. Taking all of that into consideration, imagine how much of his numbers will drop next year, and the year after that. Maybe you're happy with paying a guy over $10 million to average 4 points and 5 rebounds (you seemed to love AD's performance on the Raps), but to me, it's a big waste of money, especially when that money could be spent on actually improving the team instead of trying to shop Ben to someone who needs an expiring contract (read: REBUILDING!!!).
> 
> On the other hand, you have Chauncey, who's improved his numbers every year since 2000 and has hit his prime this year with 18 & 9. Now next year, if we see a significant drop in his play both on the stat sheet and off the court, I'd be a lot more weary when it comes to giving him a contract. And speaking of which, you said it yourself. They'll have all this money tied down to the other four guys, that makes it all the tougher to give Billups that fat contract. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that Billups will come a lot cheaper next year than Ben will come this year, so that throws that one pretty much out the window. Like I said though, I'd rather have Ford or Hinrich, but they'll likely get resigned and are RFA's to begin with.



exactly...to quote you "A guy like Billups who has his fundamentals down won't doesn't rely on speed primarily, and that's a trait that will carry on until his late 30's. And if nothing else, history should attest to this." So why does it have to apply to Wallace, and his atheletism? Wallace has arguably more fundamental skills then Billups, and so why does he have to rely on fundamentals? Rebounding? NO thats all about positioning and timing, Blocking, maybe his blockign will go down, but we do have Bosha nd Charlie to tke care of that. His Defense? Defense is all about effort and touchness, Bowen and Artest are both not the most atheletic guys on the court, however they are both HELL for opposing tam, their defense is GREAT. 

I dont think it was ever anybodies "team" that is what made the Pistons that good, as for Wallaces rebounding numbers, do u think that may have somethign to do with the fact that this team got much better rebounders, ie Prince started rebounding better, Rasheed Wallace rebounded beter, and they also got Mcdyess. Kevin Garnetts numbers have gone down also in the same period, peopel dont say that he is regressing. A Liabilty? are you serious? Take Ben Wallace out of that lineup the Pistons would not sniff the ECY, they wouldve been taken to 7 games agains the Bucks and would not have beating the Cavs.

You say that i forget to mention age and contract, well let me make it clear, sure giving Wallace that much money may be risky, but what isnt risky. You think that the SUns are cringing at the thought that Amare may not comeback as good as before. Most probably. Anything can happen tomorow, you cant predict the future. What i can predict is a Hard nosed, hard workign Blue Collar workhorse in Ben Wallace who will have the condiotionign and the body type and the desire to win, until he hits 40, and you know that you will get the full potential out of him, and again sure in the last years of his contract he probably wont be worth the money, but VERY VERY few players not named, Wade, Lebron Bosh, HOward will be worth it. and you have to pay these guys to get them here. You seem to liek very much the idea of having all this cap space but not want to use it. Wallace fills the biggest hole that we have on this team in Defense without screwign up the best thing this team has going for it, its ability to score. and i dont really remember saying i loved AD's performance, i said the team as a whole played much better with him here, b/c of the touchness and grit he provided us with. and Wallace will give us that touchness and grit while still pulling down 9-10 board and playing great defense. 

and i still dont see how you expect Billups to come "cheap" he would likely command a salary higher then any other Piston, seeing as you said it is his team and all, and if its your team, wouldnt you liek to get paid the most? and you will likely have to over pay him as well to pry him out from the Pistons, and end up paying a 36 year old pg 10-14 million


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

Okay, I never said Billups will come cheap, I said he won't be getting the same amount as Wallace - he'll be cheaper than Wallace. All in all, you didn't counter any of my points, even after specifically asking for them. Since post one, you've told me the same thing, that he'd be a good fit for our team. Now. Which he would be, but that's completely ignoring the kind of effect his contract would have in the future - it's just not a wise move, and what you're saying is that you're willing to compromise this team's future, along with Bosh and CV, and whoever we draft's with it. That's all I'm getting out of your posts. You think it's a given that teams have bad contracts in the NBA. And that's true, to an extent. But no current finals contender has a single bad contract on their team, or a contract they're desperately trying to unload. The Raptors team we've just come to shed the skin of was loaded with bad contracts - you're saying that you're content with that kind of team, and you want it again. And I'm not going to waste more time trying to explain to you why Wallace just isn't worth it.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> Okay, I never said Billups will come cheap, I said he won't be getting the same amount as Wallace - he'll be cheaper than Wallace. All in all, you didn't counter any of my points, even after specifically asking for them. Since post one, you've told me the same thing, that he'd be a good fit for our team. Now. Which he would be, but that's completely ignoring the kind of effect his contract would have in the future - it's just not a wise move, and what you're saying is that you're willing to compromise this team's future, along with Bosh and CV, and whoever we draft's with it. That's all I'm getting out of your posts. You think it's a given that teams have bad contracts in the NBA. And that's true, to an extent. But no current finals contender has a single bad contract on their team, or a contract they're desperately trying to unload. The Raptors team we've just come to shed the skin of was loaded with bad contracts - you're saying that you're content with that kind of team, and you want it again. And I'm not going to waste more time trying to explain to you why Wallace just isn't worth it.


umm i started each of my points stating what you said and then provided my insight..if thats not "countering" i really dont know what is. And you say i keep repeating myself, but you keep saying the same thing, he is old and he is not worth it, again and again. To which i replied, yes he is old, but what doesnt make it him worth it, i sid he would be a solid player due to his work ethic and the bulk of his skills lie in the fact that he is such a fundamentally sound player, and fundamentals doesnt go away due to age.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

adhir1 said:


> umm i started each of my points stating what you said and then provided my insight..if thats not "countering" i really dont know what is. And you say i keep repeating myself, but you keep saying the same thing, he is old and he is not worth it, again and again. To which i replied, yes he is old, but what doesnt make it him worth it, i sid he would be a solid player due to his work ethic and the bulk of his skills lie in the fact that he is such a *fundamentally sound player*, and fundamentals doesnt go away due to age.


What do you mean by fundamentals? I completely disagree with the statement, Ben Wallace is a fundamentaly sound player. HEs effective because of his athletisism, which is now fading. PERIOD


----------



## Team Mao (Dec 17, 2005)

mo76 said:


> What do you mean by fundamentals? I completely disagree with the statement, Ben Wallace is a fundamentaly sound player. HEs effective because of his athletisism, which is now fading. PERIOD


Yup, yup!


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

mo76 said:


> What do you mean by fundamentals? I completely disagree with the statement, Ben Wallace is a fundamentaly sound player. HEs effective because of his athletisism, which is now fading. PERIOD


umm no, Defense, Rebounding is about having your fundamentals down. When you play defense, you need to anticipate what your player is going to do, and beat him to the spot on the floor that he wants to get at, and cut off his route to the basket. Also, defense is more about having effort and trying your hardest to make it as difficult as possible to make your player work for his points. 

Rebounding is another FUNDAMENTAL skill, when your rebounding the first thing you need to do is to box your player out, and get proper positioning to be more in a position to grab that board, sure jumping high is great, but if that was the case Vince/Kobe/Lebron/Smith would be the top rebounders in the league, but none of them could out rebound Wallace/Garnett/Duncan in a one on one rebounding competion. 

Truly on the defensive side of things the only thing that requires real athletism is blocking, and i admit those things may go down, but WAllace will still be a very good defensive player even when his athletism goes away.


----------



## Team Mao (Dec 17, 2005)

Fundamentals make Ben Wallace a very good defensive player. His athleticism is what makes him an oustanding defensive player worth the max deal people are talking about. So when the athleticism fades, he will be a very good defensive player but a complete liability on the offensive end. At least Bowen, Artest, Gerald Wallace, AK and other noted excellent defensive players are capable of some offensive output.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

adhir1 said:


> umm no, Defense, Rebounding is about having your fundamentals down. When you play defense, you need to anticipate what your player is going to do, and beat him to the spot on the floor that he wants to get at, and cut off his route to the basket. Also, defense is more about having effort and trying your hardest to make it as difficult as possible to make your player work for his points.
> 
> Rebounding is another FUNDAMENTAL skill, when your rebounding the first thing you need to do is to box your player out, and get proper positioning to be more in a position to grab that board, sure jumping high is great, but if that was the case Vince/Kobe/Lebron/Smith would be the top rebounders in the league, but none of them could out rebound Wallace/Garnett/Duncan in a one on one rebounding competion.
> 
> Truly on the defensive side of things the only thing that requires real athletism is blocking, and i admit those things may go down, but WAllace will still be a very good defensive player even when his athletism goes away.


Ben Wallace isnt the only player in the NBA with adequate fundamentals on defense. Saying that ben wallace has the best defensive fundamentals is pointless, theres only so much "fundamentals" can do (especially on defense). His athletisism, instincts and tenaciosness where what sepatated him. 
When people say that a player has good fundamentals they are usually refering to their offensive game, where ben is increadably deficiant.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

mo76 said:


> Ben Wallace isnt the only player in the NBA with adequate fundamentals on defense. Saying that ben wallace has the best defensive fundamentals is pointless, theres only so much "fundamentals" can do (especially on defense). His athletisism, instincts and tenaciosness where what sepatated him.
> When people say that a player has good fundamentals they are usually refering to their offensive game, where ben is increadably deficiant.


WHAT???? Where did i say anything about offense...if it was for offense, Ben Wallace wouldnt be in the NBA, why are you even talking about offense. Fundamentals are more important on defense then offense, just for yout information. ANd where exactly did i say he was the best fundamental player in the NBA, and sure there are better fundamental players, but none of them are free agents. and none of them can have an impact on the game to the extent that WAllace can, only a given few. and you clearly must not know much about the game if you think that fundamentals can only take you so far on defense, if you know how to box out, and position yourself with ease, you will that much more of a gaet rebounder, nobody could even contest you at all.


----------



## no_free_baskets (Jan 4, 2006)

funny, i havent really even bothered to look at this thread much since i felt that theres no way that a) wallace doesnt resign with the pistons and b) that wallace would fit in the raps long-term plans, but apparently sheridan over at espn states that t.o might be a possible destination?!? is this just espn making stuff up again???


----------



## no_free_baskets (Jan 4, 2006)

wallace has incredible bball iq on the def. end...hes just a phenomenal help defender, probably one of the best of all time, and believe me, i dont drop accolades like that sparingly...incredible defender...


----------



## Pasha The Great (Apr 9, 2005)

itll be a killer for the future of the raptors to sign him with his huge contract.. bosch is going to have a big contract too.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

adhir1 said:


> WHAT???? Where did i say anything about offense...if it was for offense, Ben Wallace wouldnt be in the NBA, why are you even talking about offense. Fundamentals are more important on defense then offense, just for yout information. ANd where exactly did i say he was the best fundamental player in the NBA, and sure there are better fundamental players, but none of them are free agents. and none of them can have an impact on the game to the extent that WAllace can, only a given few. and you clearly must not know much about the game if you think that fundamentals can only take you so far on defense, if you know how to box out, and position yourself with ease, you will that much more of a gaet rebounder, nobody could even contest you at all.


 Didnt sam mitchell say himself "that you cant teach defense and rebounding." He recieved alot of critisism for this but what he meant was defensive fundamentals are easy to learn and they can only be developed to a certain extent. The fact that you think the raptors should target ben wallace in FA and sign him to a huge deal because of his defensive fundamentals shows your lack of understanding of basketball.


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

Ben's block on Shaq last night was the stuff of legends.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

speedythief said:


> Ben's block on Shaq last night was the stuff of legends.


It was nice...but it looks like he was riding him on his hip with his off hand.....but it was nice.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

mo76 said:


> Didnt sam mitchell say himself "that you cant teach defense and rebounding." He recieved alot of critisism for this but what he meant was defensive fundamentals are easy to learn and they can only be developed to a certain extent. The fact that you think the raptors should target ben wallace in FA and sign him to a huge deal because of his defensive fundamentals shows your lack of understanding of basketball.


"you cant teach defense and rebounding" really means "defense and rebounding, are easy to learn", i dont no about you but i see a little bit of a discrepancy there. If they are soo easy to learn, then WHY CANT YOU TEACH THEM? WOW, were you off base with that little, what can i call it? English Lesson maybe? What Sam REALLY meant, is defense and rebounding is all about heart and trying your damn best to get the ball for your team, and putting your greatest effort to stop the other teams players to get to that hoop, and that comes from inside, you need that desire to stop them. Thats why it cant be taught. 

And again, you really are good at putting words in my mouth, i dint say specifically that i wanted Ben for his defensive fundamentals, sure that is one of the biggest reason he is soo valuable, but i said Ben would be great b/c of his great ability to alters the other teams offenses, and getting to the rack, which seemed to be one of our biggest problems, i mean i dont no about you but i was getting sick and tired of Eddy Curry droping 25/14 on us every damn game. But i must point out that, some of the gaems best players are fundamentally sounds on both offense and defense, but hey to you i dont no the game of basketball.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

adhir1 said:


> "you cant teach defense and rebounding" really means "defense and rebounding, are easy to learn", i dont no about you but i see a little bit of a discrepancy there. If they are soo easy to learn, then WHY CANT YOU TEACH THEM? WOW, were you off base with that little, what can i call it? English Lesson maybe? What Sam REALLY meant, *is defense and rebounding is all about heart and trying your damn best to get the ball for your team, and putting your greatest effort to stop the other teams players to get to that hoop, and that comes from inside, you need that desire to stop them. *Thats why it cant be taught.
> 
> And again, you really are good at putting words in my mouth, i dint say specifically that i wanted Ben for his defensive fundamentals, sure that is one of the biggest reason he is soo valuable, but i said Ben would be great b/c of his great ability to alters the other teams offenses, and getting to the rack, which seemed to be one of our biggest problems, i mean i dont no about you but i was getting sick and tired of Eddy Curry droping 25/14 on us every damn game. But i must point out that, some of the gaems best players are fundamentally sounds on both offense and defense, but hey to you i dont no the game of basketball.


Thats my point, how are the things I highlighted defensive fundamentals? I resent the "english lesson" comment. Maybe you shouldnt be pointing fingers. I just meant that defensive fundamentals should be down by the time you get to the NBA. Thats why there not "teachable" because players should already know how to box out. Ben does have great defensive instincts and athletisism which is fading. So you think we should sign a guy thats on offensive liability and will probably be on the bench in 2 years to a max or close to a max deal? Defensive fundamentals are hardly a precious commodity as you seem to think they are. I dont see how you say i was putting words in my mouth when you were saying that one of bens great assets where his defensive fundamentals. Im just saying, yes ben does have good defensive fundamentals, so does every other center in the NBA. Anyways, theres no way in hell ben is coming to TO, and im glad.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

mo76 said:


> Thats my point, how are the things I highlighted defensive fundamentals? I resent the "english lesson" comment. Maybe you shouldnt be pointing fingers. I just meant that defensive fundamentals should be down by the time you get to the NBA. Thats why there not "teachable" because players should already know how to box out. Ben does have great defensive instincts and athletisism which is fading. So you think we should sign a guy thats on offensive liability and will probably be on the bench in 2 years to a max or close to a max deal? Defensive fundamentals are hardly a precious commodity as you seem to think they are. I dont see how you say i was putting words in my mouth when you were saying that one of bens great assets where his defensive fundamentals. Im just saying, yes ben does have good defensive fundamentals, so does every other center in the NBA. Anyways, theres no way in hell ben is coming to TO, and im glad.


ok i dunno where to start. Ill start here, i dont think you know what fundamentals are, boxing out, IS A FUNDAMENTAL SKILL, the things that you said "a player should know by the time they get to the NBA" ARE FUNDAMENTALS. And weve heard COUNTLESS times, that players are getting away from the fundamental skills that are oh so importmant. Playing smart and boxing out make it so much easier to grab a rebound, and when that athletism fades, like it will, you still use those fundamental skills, to be an above average player. and the fact that you said fundamentals arent important in todays game, is because you dont realise, how important they are, Tim Duncan isnt the flashiest player in the league, but he will be as effective as he was back in 99, as he will be in 2009, b/c he is so uses those skills to his advantage, boxing out, recognizing pick and rolls, timing on the blocks. Go and watch him in 99, when he was dunking like a mad man, he was effective back then, and now he is still that effective, b/c his athletism is fading, but he is still grabs 11 boards a game. Ben even when he will be 33-34-35 will still grab rebounds and be an amazing defender, b/c he will use those skills to grab those rebounds.


----------



## Nocioni (May 23, 2005)

Ben to canada please accept him


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

Nocioni said:


> Ben to canada please accept him


??????


----------



## Team Mao (Dec 17, 2005)

Well he's definitely a lot more available now than he was about a week ago. Still don't want him.


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

personally, tonight's game did a good thing- i think it virtually assured that ben wallace will not end up in toronto (and take all our capspace in the process, not to mention divert our attention from a stock of decent/helpful big men in this draft). yeah, one game does not a decision make, but ben had the kind of "elimination game" that you'd reserve for... well, the worst. atrocious tonight. and really, ben's biggest selling point (around the league, who knows why) is his ability to compete with shaq on the block and not be overwhelmed by diesel. well, he was overwhelmed tonight. the pistons as a team were overwhelmed- hell, they didn't block a single shot. that blows my mind.

ben is the defending dpoy, true, but who really cares now? i mean, his existence on that team- considering the way he plays- is like shoving all your eggs in one basket: here's a big man who'll play physical and take up space but won't score for you unless he's under the basket on an offensive rebound putback/slam dunk. beyond that, there really isn't much. he brings a lot but he's probably the least versatile player in the league today. i think tonight might've proved that his lack of skills wouldn't fit in well with the roster we're currently building.

anyway, i know tonight's not the night to decide how much ben's going to get paid. after all, come july 1 everything will be forgotten and ben'll probably get (near) the max, but still- tonight cemented the idea (at least in my mind) that ben certainly wouldn't be worth it. his value on the court is high, but i think it's more of an illusion than it is real. i'd stay away (although again, it's especially easy to say that tonight).

anyway... 

peace


----------



## Team Mao (Dec 17, 2005)

ballocks said:


> personally, tonight's game did a good thing- i think it virtually assured that ben wallace will not end up in toronto (and take all our capspace in the process, not to mention divert our attention from a stock of decent/helpful big men in this draft). yeah, one game does not a decision make, but ben had the kind of "elimination game" that you'd reserve for... well, the worst. atrocious tonight. and really, ben's biggest selling point (around the league, who knows why) is his ability to compete with shaq on the block and not be overwhelmed by diesel. well, he was overwhelmed tonight. the pistons as a team were overwhelmed- hell, they didn't block a single shot. that blows my mind.
> 
> ben is the defending dpoy, true, but who really cares now? i mean, his existence on that team- considering the way he plays- is like shoving all your eggs in one basket: here's a big man who'll play physical and take up space but won't score for you unless he's under the basket on an offensive rebound putback/slam dunk. beyond that, there really isn't much. he brings a lot but he's probably the least versatile player in the league today. i think tonight might've proved that his lack of skills wouldn't fit in well with the roster we're currently building.
> 
> ...


To say it was only one night is totally wrong. Ben Wallace was dominated for the entire series. And the hack-a-Ben strategy basically meant that he could only play 3 quarters or 3 and a bit. His value went down a lot over these past 6 games and I don't think that many GMs will forget about that when it comes time to sign FAs, they're not as dumb as people on messageboards make them out to be.


----------



## Junkyard Dog13 (Aug 9, 2003)

pass 10-15 mill way to much.
Draft Aldridge sign/aqquire reliable back up

develop Sow more if Sow can just be in position more often he is a poor man's Ben, but better shooting range, likes to bang, can get up in the air.

Won't amount to a D MVP but Sow could become a reliable back up if he can pick up positioning fundamentals better.


----------



## Ras (Jul 25, 2005)

*Re: So... still want Ben*

_Adhir_, you seem to not really listen to what people are telling, and just keeping repeating what you're saying.


*1)* Fundamentals are key for defense, but what helps set Ben apart is his athleticism. When that's lost (which isn't far from now), he won't be the same player. Sure he'll have his fundamentals, but he won't have much besides that. Do you really want to pay a player who only has fundamentals $15 million a year?

*2)* You make it seem like NBA franchises know they're going to not get fair value out of a deal they make. Normally when a franchise tries to lock up a player long term, it's because they're going to help long term. Teams don't go looking to sign old players to long contracts because they know they won't be worth the money at the end (unless you're Shaq and could possibly win you a championship within a few seasons). Ben Wallace wouldn't win Toronto a championship before he really fell off, and all Toronto would be stuck with is a $15 million contract that no one wants because it still has a few years left on it.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

adhir1 said:


> ok i dunno where to start. Ill start here, i dont think you know what fundamentals are, boxing out, IS A FUNDAMENTAL SKILL, the things that you said "a player should know by the time they get to the NBA" ARE FUNDAMENTALS. And weve heard COUNTLESS times, that players are getting away from the fundamental skills that are oh so importmant. Playing smart and boxing out make it so much easier to grab a rebound, and when that athletism fades, like it will, you still use those fundamental skills, to be an above average player. and the fact that you said fundamentals arent important in todays game, is because you dont realise, how important they are, Tim Duncan isnt the flashiest player in the league, but he will be as effective as he was back in 99, as he will be in 2009, b/c he is so uses those skills to his advantage, boxing out, recognizing pick and rolls, timing on the blocks. Go and watch him in 99, when he was dunking like a mad man, he was effective back then, and now he is still that effective, b/c his athletism is fading, but he is still grabs 11 boards a game. Ben even when he will be 33-34-35 will still grab rebounds and be an amazing defender, b/c he will use those skills to grab those rebounds.


I know what fundamentals are. Stop hiding behind statements like "Tim Duncan has great fundamentals." :|


----------

