# How do you people NOT REALIZE that the Celtics have just gotten A WHOLE LOT WORSE?



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

I mean, people! VIN BAKER! How do you get better--either from a basketball point of view or from a financial point of view--by trading for Vin Baker? VIN BAKER! Vin Baker is NOT a good NBA player! Shammond Williams is NOT a good NBA player!

The point of this deal is to save money NEXT SEASON--it is a QUICK FIX--the team wasn't going to be able to re-sign Rodney Rogers (not to mention Erick Strickland or Mark Blount) without taking the dreaded luxury tax hit! So, rather than suffering through a temporarily bloated payroll (i.e., dealing with a $62 mil payroll next season, ONE SEASON, then letting Kenny Anderson's contract die a natural death) and maintaining the current roster of guys who took you from the lottery to the Eastern Conference Finals, you have traded for the hated--and I do mean HATED--Vin Baker! Which kills yr chances of adding any significant players over the next 3-4 years! VIN BAKER! Stop trying to put a positive spin on this, people! VIN BAKER SUCKS!

All you have to do to know how much worse the Celtics just got here is to look at the top ten players (each team needs 9-10 guys who can PLAY, who can CONTRIBUTE for you) from 2001-02, then compare these guys to the top ten guys from 2002-03. Here are your top ten players from the 2001-02 Boston Celtics first (based on minutes/game):

1 Antoine Walker
2 Paul Pierce
3 Kenny Anderson
4 Tony Delk
5 Tony Battie
6 Eric Williams
7 Rodney Rogers
8 Erick Strickland
9 Vitaly Potapenko
10 Walter McCarty

NOW, take a look at your 2002-03 Boston Celtics:

1 Antoine Walker
2 Paul Pierce
3 Vin Baker
4 Tony Delk
5 Tony Battie
6 Eric Williams
7 Shammond Williams
8 Walter McCarty
9 Kedrick Brown
10 JR Bremer

You are replacing Kenny Anderson with Vin Baker at #3 (a downgrade, and that's coming from someone who doesn't like Anderson at ALL); you are replacing Rodney Rogers with Shammond Williams (a SIGNIFICANT downgrade, dear LORD what a downgrade); you are replacing Erick Strickland with Walter McCarty, who moves up from #10 to #8 (not a good thing AT ALL); you are replacing Vitaly Potapenko with Kedrick Brown, who moves up from #13 (he was behind #11 Milt Palacio and #12 Mark Blount last year in minutes/game) to #9 (and the dude IS NOT READY to play important minutes for a serious contender, in case you don't know--although, to be fair, it's nice to finally get rid of Potapenko's contract, and Brown certainly has an upside, although how much better is Richard Jefferson, who the Celts COULD'VE drafted over Brown?); and you are replacing McCarty with JR BREMER at #10, that's right, JR BREMER, WHO DIDN'T EVEN GET DRAFTED FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!

IN OTHER WORDS: You are replacing Kenny Anderson, Rodney Rogers, Erick Strickland, and Vitaly Potapenko with Vin Baker, Shammond Williams, Kedrick Brown, and JR Bremer. NOT GOOD!

And WHO THE HELL starts at point guard for this team? Here is Tony Delk's career high in assists/game: 2.6. Here is Shammond Williams' career high in assists/game: 2.8. And DON'T TELL ME that you're going to let Antoine Walker play "the point forward position," I don't want to hear it! How the HELL is a team with no point guard going to get the ball to Vin Baker just the way Vin Baker likes it? Answer: IT'S NOT!

And HOW is Vin Baker a better player than Rodney Rogers? Answer: HE'S NOT! How is Vin Baker going to fit into the Celtics' up-tempo game? Answer: HE'S NOT! How is Vin Baker going to respond to four years of boos and cat-calls from the Boston media and fans? Answer: VERY POORLY! You're talking about a depressive personality here, people! You're talking about somebody who couldn't handle the pressure of playing for THE SEATTLE SUPERSONICS! How is the pressure of playing for the BOSTON CELTICS going to be less than the pressure of playing for Seattle? Answer: IT'S NOT!

I just don't GET how you fellers think that your Celtics didn't just get A WHOLE LOT WORSE here! I just don't! Don't get me wrong, you're still a playoff team, Pierce and Walker (and O'Brien) are simply too damn good to let this team completely fall apart. But HOW is this team going to be a top four team in the East? Here are my projected 2002-03 Eastern Conference standings (along with the average win-loss records of Eastern Conference teams PER POSITION IN THE STANDINGS over the past seven years--keep in mind that these win-loss records are inflated, since the East of 5 years ago was SIGNIFICANTLY better than the East of today--but I'm a statistical purist, so humor me):

1 Nets 60-22
2 Pistons 55-27
3 Hornets 52-30
4 Bucks 49-33
5 Celtics 48-34
6 Magic 47-35
7 76ers 44-38
8 Pacers 43-39
---
9 Heat 41-41
10 Raptors 37-45
11 Bulls 34-48
12 Hawks 31-51
13 Knicks 27-55
14 Wizards 24-58
15 Cavs 16-66

I don't know, fellas--I just don't know. ACTUALLY, I DO know--the Celtics just got WORSE! Prepare for The Vin Baker Era, people! You're not going to like it! I mean, come ON, don't be like these Warriors fans around here who are "optimistic" about "their team in a couple of years"--be REALISTIC. Optimism is great, no doubt, but this team won't be back in the Eastern Conference Finals for A LONG LONG TIME! Sorry! I'm not trying to piss you people off, I'm just trying to put a STOP to the ridiculous "I think Vin Baker can be a big player for us" posts! COME TO YOUR SENSES, PEOPLES!


----------



## STING (May 29, 2002)

Well, I can't answer for them, so let me point out that I really don't think we did get better. I think i have already made it clear what I think of this trade, lol.

I really don't know what went on in OBs head, I really, really disagree with whatever it is.

Whos going to start at point for us? Tony Delk? Fair enough, whos going to sub? Omar F******** Cook??!!!?!?!?!?!?

Thats what annoys me. We need a point guard, not a forward

Our forwards

Antione Walker
Paul Pierce
Eric Williams
Kendrick Brown

Assuming we resign at least 1 more, we have it made at forward

Now lets take a look at our point guards

Tony Delk
Omar Cook
Shamond Williams

Not trying to be pesimistic of course, but 

WHAT THE HELL IS THAT?????

Sorry for my outburst

We are screwed if we don't get something better there.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

I CANNOT BELIEVE for a SECOND that 4 out of the 9 voters here think that the Celtics have gotten BETTER by trading for VINNY BAKER and letting Rodney Rogers, Erick Strickland, and Mark Blount go! FELLAS!

Here's what the East could look like next season:

1 Nets
2 Pistons
3 Hornets (assuming Baron Davis is back)
4 76ers
5 Magic (assuming Grant Hill does ALRIGHT)
6 Pacers
7 Wizards (assuming MJ stays relatively healthy)
8 Celtics (the Vin Baker trade will be a DISASTER)
---
9 Heat
10 Bucks
11 Raptors
12 Bulls
13 Hawks
14 Knicks
15 Cavs


----------



## STING (May 29, 2002)

Wow, I had no idea you thought it would do THAT much damage

I disagree, I don't like the trade at all, but Its not going to make us worse than the Wizards. Thats a no-go. :yes:


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

There is no way that any of those 7 teams will be in front of us. The deal is not bad, and I am still trying to figure out who we lost. If this is the answer then look at my answers

Kenny-The guy sux

Pot-LOL

Forte-Only a Good future player.


----------



## IGrowHemp (Jul 8, 2002)

This trade was GOOD!!!!

why you ask, well it's simple because of three main points.

1) With Vin Baker, the celtics now have the best front court in the entire east. Name a better one than Baker/Walker/Pierce. You simply can't. Behind a healthy Zo and Brad Miller, Baker is the 3rd best starting center in the entire eastern conference. Not to mention the first 41 games in the pf heavy west Vinny got 16.8 pts and 6.8 brds a game.

2) This was the only way to bring in a legit bigman 3rd scorer. With kennys contract off next year we get 9 million right? Well with pauls max contract kicking in the c's no have about 4 million to spend in cash, no say they resigned kenny to a 2million dollar deal, we got 2million left and if we resigned rogers instead of trading for vin, we have no cap room like we do now.

3) We get a pg that fits obs system perfect in shammy williams, shammy shoots the lights out and has fast hands on d. Not only that, but just like with strick, the c's will find someone else to play the point for them this year. When Jax is waived by the nuggets, how many of you would be cheering in the c's signed him, what about when no one offers best a contract and the c's could pick him up cheap? The c's will get a pg, but until then their lineup looks like this

PG - Shammy/Delk/Bremmer
SG - Pierce/KB/Delk
SF - Ewill/KB/Walta
PF - Walker/Battie/Walta
C - Baker/Battie/Sundov

we have good depth at every position and will have great depth when we sign that FA point. Battie can be just as good at 6th man as rogers, and paul and twan can kick it out of the double to a low post threat in baker or a high % 3 point shooter in shammy williams, I LOVE THIS TRADE!!!


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

*Dude!*



> Originally posted by *IGrowHemp *
> This trade was GOOD!!!!
> 
> why you ask, well it's simple because of three main points.
> ...


Later on in this post, you correctly project Paul Pierce as the Celtics' starting SG. So how is he a frontcourt player?

Here is the Celtic's starting frontcourt: Eric Williams, Antoine Walker, Vin Baker. Let's see, I'd say that Eric Williams is EASILY one of the 3-4 WORST starting small forwards in the NBA next season (Eddie Robinson and whoever the hell the Hawks will start at SF--Dion Glover?--are worse, and that's IT; I'd take guys like Michael Curry, Greg Buckner, and Bruce Bowen over Eric Williams any day of the week). Vin Baker is HARDLY the third best starting center in the East--in fact, I'd put him behind Dikembe Mutombo, Alonzo Mourning, Brad Miller, Antonio Davis, Elden Campbell, Clifford Robinson, Kurt Thomas (who is EFFECTIVELY the Knicks' starting center--undersized, sure, but the guy is a hell of a lot better than Vinny Baker), Todd MacCulloch, and Theo Ratliff. So, he's not the third best C in the East, he's the TENTH best C in the East--ahead of Zydrunas Ilgauskus, Andrew DeClercq, Jahidi White, Eddy Curry, and Joel Pryzbilla.

Antonie Walker IS the best PF in the East, you're right about that. But the Celtics HARDLY have the "best frontcourt in the Eastern Conference"--I'd put them behind SEVERAL teams. I'd put them behind (in no particular order) New Orleans, Miami, New Jersey, Detroit, Indiana, Philadelphia, and Atlanta (assuming Ratliff gets and stays relatively healthy). SO, the Celtics don't have the BEST frontcourt in the East, they have at BEST the NINTH-best frontcourt in the East.



> 2) This was the only way to bring in a legit bigman 3rd scorer. With kennys contract off next year we get 9 million right? Well with pauls max contract kicking in the c's no have about 4 million to spend in cash, no say they resigned kenny to a 2million dollar deal, we got 2million left and if we resigned rogers instead of trading for vin, we have no cap room like we do now.


If anybody out there feels like translating the above paragraph into English for me, I'd appreciate it.



> 3) We get a pg that fits obs system perfect in shammy williams, shammy shoots the lights out and has fast hands on d. Not only that, but just like with strick, the c's will find someone else to play the point for them this year. When Jax is waived by the nuggets, how many of you would be cheering in the c's signed him, what about when no one offers best a contract and the c's could pick him up cheap?


It's looking like this team might NOT get a point guard for cheap. I see where you're coming from, but Chris Childs is on the verge of signing with the Nuggets, Jeff McInnis is on the verge of signing with either Portland or Minnesota, Travis Best will end up SOMEWHERE. If the Celtics sign a free agent PG, it will have to be for the league minimum, because this team doesn't want to pay the luxury tax (which is why Rodney Rogers, Erick Strickland, and Mark Blount aren't getting re-signed). Kevin Ollie will be the best PG this team can get for the league minimum, and he's a SIGNIFICANT UPGRADE over Shammond Williams. I mean, listen to what you are saying--SHAMMOND WILLIAMS? That dude is TERRIBLE! Whoever the Celtics end up with at PG--Shammond Williams, Kevin Ollie, Antonio Daniels, or Tony Delk (or JR BREMER)--you're looking at the WORST starting PG in the NBA next season! Here are the other contenders for the title of "worst starting point guard in the league" for 2002-03: Rod Strickland, Charlie Ward, Dan Dickau, Gilbert Arenas. I think that all four of those dudes are better than Shammond Williams AND Tony Delk (who I LIKE, but NOT as a starting point guard, great shooter, great bench player, but NOT a starting NBA point guard) AND Antonio Daniels. I sort of like Kevin Ollie, I like how he runs a team, I'd maybe put him ahead of those four dudes, but he's nothing special, OBVIOUSLY.

I don't know, fellers--Jim O'Brien has done a HELL of a job with the Celtics ever since he replaced Ego Pitino, Paul Pierce and Antoine Walker are FANTASTIC players--but the rest of the team SUUUUUUUUCKS. I'm sticking with my guns here--the Celtics are the #8 team in the East next season. Unless MJ has another disappointing injury-plagued season (OR if he decides to not come back), then I'll bump Boston up to #7.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: Dude!*



> Originally posted by *robyg1974 *
> 
> I don't know, fellers--Jim O'Brien has done a HELL of a job with the Celtics ever since he replaced Ego Pitino,...


That is what will get the Celtics back to the top of the east.


----------



## STING (May 29, 2002)

RobyG....

Eric Williams, Antione Walker, and Vin Baker will almost definitly NOT be the starting frontcourt. 

Antione Walker will most likely be moved to SF, Vin Baker at PF, and Tony Battie will stay at center. As for saying Eddie Robinson, Eric Williams and Dion Glover will be the three worst starting small forwards in the NBA next season, I just don't see how you get that idea. They would all be in my top 50th percentile as far as starting small forwards go. Excpet maybe Williams, he needs another year or two.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by *STING *
> As for saying Eddie Robinson, Eric Williams and Dion Glover will be the three worst starting small forwards in the NBA next season, I just don't see how you get that idea. They would all be in my top 50th percentile as far as starting small forwards go. Excpet maybe Williams, he needs another year or two.


Dude, I gotta say, you're KILLING your credibility BIG TIME with this statement. You're saying those three dudes are all in the top 50th percentile? So you're saying that those three dudes are all in the top 15 at their position (since there are 29 teams)?

Here's my list of the top 20 starting SFs in the league:

1 Kevin Garnett
2 Dirk Nowitzki
3 Michael Jordan
4 Peja Stojakovic
5 Shawn Marion
6 Lamar Odom
7 Grant Hill
8 Rashard Lewis
9 Jamal Mashburn
10 Latrell Sprewell
11 Juwan Howard
12 Caron Butler
13 Glenn Robinson
14 Keith Van Horn
15 Scottie Pippen
16 Al Harrington
17 Lamond Murray
18 Mike Dunleavy
19 Andrei Kirilenko
20 Rick Fox

So, uh, I could keep going here, but what's the point? Sting, how in the HELL can you put either Eddie Robinson OR Eric Williams OR Dion Glover in the top 15? How can you even put them in the top twenty? So you're saying that ALL THREE of those dudes are better than Glenn Robinson AND Keith Van Horn AND Scottie Pippen?

Like I said, your credibility is taking a BEATING here, Sting! Take it back! Save yourself! There is still time!

And Eric Williams "needs another year or two"? Uh, Sting, uh, Eric Williams begins HIS EIGHTH SEASON next year, he is THIRTY YEARS OLD. By the way, here are Williams' stats from last season:

23.6 minutes/game (6th on the team)
37.4 FG% (11th on the team)
27.9 3Pt% (8th on the team)
73.1 FT% (8th on the team)
6.4 points/game (8th on the team)
3.0 rebounds/game (8th on the team, behind TONY DELK)
1.5 assists/game (7th on the team)
1.3 turnovers/game (5th on the team)
1.04 steals/game (4th on the team)
0.11 blocks/game (11th on the team, behind Delk and Kenny A)

Pretty mediocre player. Absolutely one of the 2-3 worst starting SFs in the league!


----------



## havok106 (Jul 12, 2002)

*not that bad*

a year ago everyone was hoping kenny would spontaneusly combust. now we got rid of him AND vitally. i was hoping vitally would get deported or something. worst trade in celtics history BY FAR.:upset: but i didn't want baker either. BUT it is better than the tinsley trade, cause we don't get crosheire. vin's contract only has another 3 years on it. so did vitally's. i don't like this trade either. but i deffinately feel it could have an upside to it. i would have rather sign kenny and rodney and say screw the lux tax, but i'm not paying it so... :sigh:. i just have hope that my c's will be good enough with baker to make a deep playoff run, they weren't going to win it all any way, not for another couple of years at least. so what's the difference really.


----------



## STING (May 29, 2002)

Let me put this a different way Roby G, I'm not killing my credibility here, I think you are trying to convince us that Kieth Van Horn is better than Eddy Robinson. As for Eric Williams's 8 years pro. Dont tell me about the Celtic's stats, I'm a celts fan, and It is my opinion that after 8 years, he is still taking his steps in improvement. Thats my opinion, and I don't appreciate you attacking it. 

Alright, Dion Glover is not top 15, but Eddie Robinson?? 

In 22.5 minutes per game, he averaged 9 points, 2.7 rebounds, and 1.3 assists with .453 FG%, and 400% 3PT percentage.

It is my opinion that those are pretty good stats considering the PT he got. 

I'd appreciate if you wouldn't attack my opinions based on yours, thanks


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by *STING *
> Let me put this a different way Roby G, I'm not killing my credibility here, I think you are trying to convince us that Kieth Van Horn is better than Eddy Robinson.


Somebody help a brother out over here! Somebody get my back! Somebody tell Sting that Keith Van Horn is a better player than Eddie Robinson! Please!



> As for Eric Williams's 8 years pro. Dont tell me about the Celtic's stats, I'm a celts fan, and It is my opinion that after 8 years, he is still taking his steps in improvement. Thats my opinion, and I don't appreciate you attacking it.


Somebody help a brother out over here! Somebody get my back! Somebody tell Sting that Eric Williams AIN'T getting any better!



> Alright, Dion Glover is not top 15, but Eddie Robinson??


Somebody help... sorry, that's getting obnoxious, I KNOW, I KNOW. Anyway... somebody tell Sting that Eddie Robinson is not better than RICK FOX, much less Keith Van Horn, Glenn Robinson, or Scottie Pippen! Please! 



> I'd appreciate if you wouldn't attack my opinions based on yours, thanks


C'mon, man, don't get all testy, we're just talking sports here! But Keith Van Horn being better than Eddie Robinson AIN'T my OPINION, that's a FACT! C'mon! Save yourself, Sting! It's not too late! What is it that Jimmy V once said? "Never give up, don't ever, ever, EVER give up!" Listen to Jimmy V! If you would like to make a donation to the Jimmy V Foundation, please make your check payable to...


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

EWill is a lot better then a lot of those players, but defensivly, offensivly he sux, thats why I don't want him on the team, but he is top 10 in defense in the league.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by *the_truth *
> EWill is a lot better then a lot of those players, but defensivly, offensivly he sux, thats why I don't want him on the team, but he is top 10 in defense in the league.


The Truth--so where would you put Eric Williams on that list? You're telling me he's a better NBA player than Keith Van Horn? Glenn Robinson? Scottie Pippen? Come ON!

Fellas! ERIC WILLIAMS!


----------



## STING (May 29, 2002)

Well If you really want to go deeper into this whole "Eddy Robinson vs. Kieth Van Horn" thing, I'll add another demention.

*PPM*
Van Horn - 0.486
Robinson - 0.400

*RPM*
Van Horn - 0.246
Robinson - 0.142

*APM*
Van Horn - 0.064
Robinson- 0. 058

*FG%*
Van Horn - 0.433
Robinson - 0.453

*3PT%*
Van Horn - 0.345
Robinson - 0.400

*TOPM*
Van Horn - 0.060
Robinson - 0.052

*BPM*
Van Horn - 0.016
Robinson - 0.020

Not to mention that Kieth Van Horn is soft as a babies ***

I think thats close enough for two people to have different opinions.

Its not a fact that Kieth Van Horn is better, its your opinion

Peace


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by *robyg1974 *
> 
> 
> The Truth--so where would you put Eric Williams on that list? You're telling me he's a better NBA player than Keith Van Horn? Glenn Robinson? Scottie Pippen? Come ON!
> ...


Pippen-Definitly

Van Horn-Yes, Jefferson would have played better then Van Horn did

Robinson-Yes, where did he bring his team? Besides the lottery pick.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by *the_truth *
> 
> Pippen-Definitly
> 
> ...


Okay, hold on--you're saying that Pippen is DEFINITELY better than Eric Williams? Or Eric Williams is DEFINITELY better than Pippen?

STING! If Eddie Robinson were one of the top 15 SFs in the league, well, wouldn't a terrible Bulls team be playing him more than 22.5 minutes/game? Especially since they gave him that huge longterm contract? That Bulls team last year SUCKED! You're telling me that, if either Keith Van Horn or Glenn Robinson or Scottie Pippen were on last year's Bulls team instead of Eddie Robinson, that they wouldn't have gotten any more than 22.5 minutes/game? You're telling me that Keith Van Horn wouldn't have averaged 30+ minutes/game for last year's terrible Bulls team? And don't give me this retarded "per 48 minutes" crap--I believe that Willie Solomon had better "per 48 minutes" numbers than Shane Battier last year--THEY WERE ON THE SAME TEAM--obviously, if Willie Solomon were a better player than Shane Battier, HE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN MORE MINUTES. Keep in mind that backups are putting up stats against OTHER BACKUPS usually, and that a LOT of the time, these backups are putting up meaningless stats in the fourth quarter of a game that has already been decided!

The better you are, the more minutes you get, that's all there is to it. We're not talking about POTENTIAL here, we're talking about REALITY. Does Eddie Robinson have the POTENTIAL to be better than Keith Van Horn? Well, maybe he does, maybe he doesn't, but we're talking about REALITY here! Keith Van Horn played 30.4 minutes/game for a team that had the best record in the Eastern Conference, while Eddie Robinson played 22.5 minutes/game for a team that had the worst record in the Eastern Conference. I mean, can you get any more clear cut than that? Answer: NO.

Here are some comparisons, if you guys want to continue this argument, you're going to have to continue it with somebody else. Here, take a look:

Minutes/game

Pippen--32.2
Glenn Robinson--35.5
Van Horn--30.4
Eric Williams--23.6
Eddie Robinson--22.5

Points/game

Pippen--10.6
Glenn Robinson--20.7
Van Horn--14.8
Eric Williams--6.4
Eddie Robinson--9.0

Rebounds/game

Pippen--5.2
Glenn Robinson--6.2
Van Horn--7.5
Eric Williams--3.0
Eddie Robinson--2.7

Assists/game

Pippen--5.9
Glenn Robinson--2.5
Van Horn--2.0
Eric Williams--1.5
Eddie Robinson--1.3

Blocks/game

Pippen--0.56
Glenn Robinson--0.62
Van Horn--0.52
Eric Williams--0.11
Eddie Robinson--0.38

Steals/game

Pippen--1.63
Glenn Robinson--1.47
Van Horn--0.78
Eric Williams--1.04
Eddie Robinson--0.79

Threes/game

Pippen--0.9
Glenn Robinson--0.9
Van Horn--1.2
Eric Williams--0.3
Eddie Robinson--0.1

NOW! The ONLY AREA in which either Eric Williams or Eddie Robinson exceeded either Scottie Pippen OR Glenn Robinson OR Keith Van Horn was in steals/game. Eddie Robinson had 0.01 more steals/game--0.01!--than Van Horn, while Eric Williams had 0.26 more steals/game than Van Horn. THAT'S IT. Of the seven categories above, THAT'S IT.

NOW! Don't you think that, if Eric Williams and Eddie Robinson were better than any one of these three dudes, that they would be able to do a little bit better than THAT?

ONE LAST THING. Eddie Robinson played in 29 games last year, he started in only 12 games. Eric Williams played in 74 games, he got only 30 starts.

FACT: Keith Van Horn is a better starting small forward than either Eric Williams or Eddie Robinson. Not opinion, FACT.

FACT: Glenn Robinson is a better starting small forward than either Eric Williams or Eddie Robinson. Not opinion, FACT.

FACT: Scottie Pippen is a better starting small forward than either Eric Williams or Eddie Robinson. Not opinion, FACT.

Okay, now I'm done.


----------



## STING (May 29, 2002)

Look at a few players that at some point, or still are, on the Bulls roster

Ron Mercer
Jalen Rose
Ron Artest

Those are all players Eddie Robinson had to compete with, and considering them all, I'd say 22.5 minutes per game is pretty good. 

It was per minute, not per 48 minutes

You say that having more minutes means your better? What kind of crap is that? Thats total BS dude

If Steve Francis, Stephon Marbury, and Andre Miller were all on the same team, one of those players AT LEAST wouldn't get very much playing time at all. Then take a trip to Orlando where Armstrong starts at the point, thus getting more playing time.

Does this make Armstrong the better player? NO!

Simple as that

I dare you to put up a poll asking people whether they think Eddie Robinson or Kieth Van Horn is the better player. Although most may pick Horny Mini-van, You will still get enough for E-Rob to prove that It *IS* a matter of opinion

Eddie Robinson is also a much better defender than Van Horn, but stats unfortunatly can't show how many points they let their man get.

There is another reason.

Argue as long as you want, its a matter of opinion

Technically, everything is a matter of opinion to some extent. You could even make a case that Shaq isn't as good as Alonzo mourning because hes out of shape and overweight. Does this make him a bad player? Obviously not -- Does this allow someone to prefer Alonzo over Shaq? YES

I think E-Rob is better, OPINION STATED

Obviously you disagree, good for you

But you are NOT going to convince me to like Van Horn better, enough said

Peace


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by *robyg1974 *
> 
> 
> Okay, hold on--you're saying that Pippen is DEFINITELY better than Eric Williams? Or Eric Williams is DEFINITELY better than Pippen?


EWill is better then Pippen. Pippen is a legend but not this year, and as you can see Pippen plays 10 more minutes then EWill does.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by *STING *
> Look at a few players that at some point, or still are, on the Bulls roster
> 
> Ron Mercer
> ...


I just sat down and did some calculations (since I am, obviously, a TOTAL LOSER). After the Pacers-Bulls trade, which shipped off Mercer and Artest, Eddie Robinson THEORETICALLY had fewer people to compete with for minutes. So what happened? He continued to be, for the most part, the team's TENTH MAN (behind Rose, Hassell, Best, Chandler, Curry, Crawford, Fizer, Bagaric, and CHARLES OAKLEY). Here are the numbers "E-Rob" put up after the trade:

13 games (he missed plenty of games last year, as you know)
19.5 minutes/game (worse than before)
6.2 points/game (worse than before)
2.0 rebounds/game (worse than before)
1.0 assists/game (worse than before)
0.9 steals/game (BETTER than before!)
0.31 blocks/game (worse than before)

In FACT, the dude wasn't even a starter last year--Jalen Rose started at SF, Trenton Hassell started at SG. I was under the impression that, going into the 2002-03 season, "E-Rob" was the team's starter at SF, while Rose was being moved over to SG. So what makes this debate even MORE RIDICULOUS is the fact that Eddie Robinson shouldn't even be ON any "top starting SFs in the NBA" list, since he doesn't even START!

Oh yeah, on 3 April, Cartwright gave Robinson a start at SF, he moved Rose over to starting SG for the night. Robinson was given 37 MINUTES that night, this was his big opportunity to prove to the Stings and the The Truths of the world that he was, after all, a better player than Keith Van Horn. Here's his line from that night:

37 minutes
4-for-8 from the field
2-for-2 from the line
10 points
3 rebounds
1 assist
1 steal
1 block

A monster game, Eddie! Alright!



> You say that having more minutes means your better? What kind of crap is that? Thats total BS dude


Uh, WHAT? The better you are, the more minutes you get. I mean, seriously--if Player A gets 30 minutes/game, and his teammate, Player B, gets 15 minutes/game, WHO IS THE BETTER PLAYER? If Player B was the better player, well, why isn't he getting more minutes than Player A? A coach will play his best players more minutes than his other players--if you're not getting many minutes, that obviously means that your coach doesn't think you're a particularly good player.

I mean, HOW HARD IS THAT TO UNDERSTAND? Answer: NOT HARD AT ALL.



> If Steve Francis, Stephon Marbury, and Andre Miller were all on the same team, one of those players AT LEAST wouldn't get very much playing time at all. Then take a trip to Orlando where Armstrong starts at the point, thus getting more playing time.
> 
> Does this make Armstrong the better player? NO!
> 
> Simple as that


Quite possibly the worst example I've ever seen anybody to use to "prove their point"! Why would Francis, Marbury, and Miller all be on the same team? Answer: THEY WOULDN'T. Besides, Eddie Robinson wasn't on the same team as, say, Stojakovic, Shawn Marion, and Lamar Odom last season--during his final 13 games, THESE are the players he was competing with:

Jalen Rose
Trenton Hassell
Jamal Crawford

That's it! Jerry Krause is paying Eddie Robinson a ridiculous amount of money over the next four years, while Trenton Hassell was a rookie second-rounder--NOW, who do you think the Bulls would rather play? All things being equal, wouldn't the Bulls OBVIOUSLY rather play Robinson over Hassell? OF COURSE!



> I dare you to put up a poll asking people whether they think Eddie Robinson or Kieth Van Horn is the better player. Although most may pick Horny Mini-van, You will still get enough for E-Rob to prove that It *IS* a matter of opinion


If 1 out of 5 people say that they think the world is flat, does that make it a matter of opinion? According to your logic, YES, IT DOES.



> Eddie Robinson is also a much better defender than Van Horn, but stats unfortunatly can't show how many points they let their man get.


You have a point there! I'd like to see the league keep up with this stat, because I KNOW it's possible.



> Technically, everything is a matter of opinion to some extent. You could even make a case that Shaq isn't as good as Alonzo mourning because hes out of shape and overweight. Does this make him a bad player? Obviously not -- Does this allow someone to prefer Alonzo over Shaq? YES


Oh dear GOD! Again, some things are NOT a matter of opinion. Shaq is a significantly better player than Mourning at this point--that is not my opinion, that is a FACT! If someone thinks that Mourning is better than Shaq, well, THEY'RE WRONG! Period! They have A LOUSY OPINION!



> Peace


Peace. This is just basketball we're talking about, after all. Have a good weekend, dude!


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by *the_truth *
> EWill is better then Pippen. Pippen is a legend but not this year, and as you can see Pippen plays 10 more minutes then EWill does.


Again, the reason Scottie Pippen gets more minutes/game than Eric Williams is BECAUSE SCOTTIE PIPPEN IS A BETTER PLAYER! Answer this question: if Eric Williams got traded to the Trailblazers, who do you think would get more minutes, Williams or Pippen?

Please understand that whichever player gets more minutes is deemed the better player by the coach. I hope you know that, if Williams were a Blazer last season, Pippen would've gotten more minutes than him. In fact, Williams would get fewer minutes than Ruben Patterson, too. In FACT, Williams might not have even PLAYED for that Portland team last year!

Please tell me that you think Pippen would've gotten more minutes than Williams if they played on the same team! C'mon!


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by *robyg1974 *
> 
> 
> Again, the reason Scottie Pippen gets more minutes/game than Eric Williams is BECAUSE SCOTTIE PIPPEN IS A BETTER PLAYER! Answer this question: if Eric Williams got traded to the Trailblazers, who do you think would get more minutes, Williams or Pippen?
> ...


Yeah Pippen would have gotten more minutes then EWill, but would he be better NO! Pippen was a player, but will not improve at all, but neither will EWill, I always wonder what happened to the player that avaraged 20 points in his 2 or 3 year.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*You know what!*

I am just gonna drop it, as neither one of us three can reach an agreement. Bye Guys.


----------



## STING (May 29, 2002)

I agree with the truth, this is going nowhere, we obviously aren't going to agree robyg, so lets just drop it.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

*Agreed!*

Have a good weekend, fellers!


----------



## STING (May 29, 2002)

Same to both of you

Peace


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Yeah same to you two, too! (Whispering as he walks away) ewill is better. j/k


----------



## STING (May 29, 2002)

lol


----------

