# Walker hating on a whole new level.



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

I was reading the Boston Globe Sunday morning and Peter May's column included a list of the top FAs ranked by position. There were some obvious choices, like Shaq first at center and Ray Allen first at SG. There were some questionable choices, namely Michael Redd over Larry Hughes for the number two spot at SG.

Then I got to PF. Peter May listed seven, among them were:

Shareef Abdur-Rahim
Kwame Brown
Dan Gadzuric
Udonis Haslem
Stromile Swift
Keith Van Horn
Antoine Walker

Gadzuric, obviously, was last. Second to last, however, was not Kwame Brown who was suspended for the playoffs, was not Keith Van Horn who has a horrifically soft reputation, was not Stromile Swift who is a rather un skilled player, and it was not Shareef Abdur-Rahim who has never played in the playoffs ever. Instead, it was Antoine Walker. Now, say what you will about Walker, but who is better, him or any of those guys on that list?

I've seen Walker haters here, but this is taking it to a whole new level. I honestly cannot think of a single logical argument to take any of those guys over Walker.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

Shaq has a PO, and KVH does as well... doubtful they become FAs.

-Petey


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

Shoot. I read the title and I thought you were going to post our AIM conversation :clown:


----------



## ZWW (Jan 17, 2004)

agoo101284 said:


> I was reading the Boston Globe Sunday morning and Peter May's column included a list of the top FAs ranked by position. There were some obvious choices, like Shaq first at center and Ray Allen first at SG. There were some questionable choices, namely Michael Redd over Larry Hughes for the number two spot at SG.
> 
> Then I got to PF. Peter May listed seven, among them were:
> 
> ...


I agree with the Walker hating.

Antoine is obviously better than Van Horn. Let's get that one right out of the way. Stromile Swift? What's he accomplished so far? Kwame Brown is a big bust with an attitude problem. SAR will never be on a playoff team unless he turns into a Antonio McDyess type role. Gadzuric goes last. Udonis Haslem? Good player, benefits playing with Shaq and Wade, but hasn't had the career Toine has had (ok, so he's a little young too) and I just don't think he's as talented. But Walker jacks up too many 3's, has bad shot selection, shoots a bad FG% and misses easy ones. They always bring that up. As far as I know, he's a better passer than any of those guys and he's as good a rebounder as any of them, and he doesn't knock his teammates or team ever. 

Walker's getting robbed on that list, if you ask me.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

That is a joke, Walker is the best on the list, the only person on that list that I might like as well is SAR bc even though he's never been on a winning team I don't think that's his fault, he's been like Elton Brand just on bad teams with little help but to put Walker below all those guys is just a joke and Kwame Brown should have been LAST!


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

if i give my honest opinion on that article the mods would have to edit every word i said...so im just going to keep quiet about this one...everyone knows where i stand


----------



## MacDanny 6 (Jun 7, 2002)

Walker is garbage. I would take any of those players on the list except Gadzuric over Walker. I would try everything possible just to keep Walker off my team.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Here we go again...


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Franco 5 said:


> Walker is garbage. I would take any of those players on the list except Gadzuric over Walker. I would try everything possible just to keep Walker off my team.



how bout those magic huh???...what a great team ...tony battie is much better than walker


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Franco 5 said:


> Walker is garbage. I would take any of those players on the list except Gadzuric over Walker. I would try everything possible just to keep Walker off my team.


Sorry, but SARs, 'Stro, and Horny haven't seen the day that they're as good as Walker, and I'm _not_ a Walker fan. But those guys seriously suck. If Keith van Horn were black he'd be the most hated player in NBA fandom, he makes 'Toine look athletic, 'Melo a lockdown defender, Mark Blount dedicated and Drew Gooden an offensive force. He is a Jiri Welsch level scrub. Five years into his NBA career and 'Stro still hasn't shown any awareness that the 'B' stands for _basketball_ and SARs makes Carlos Boozer look like a defensive force. No thanks to any of them. Gadzuric makes a better Blount replacement than Walker replacement. Kwame I might take a flyer on for potential, but I'd seriously want a vet like Walker to keep an eye on him (for all his faults he's great with younger players). Udonis isn't bad, but it's easy to be a short 4 when you're playing next to Shaq. If someone with a soft center signs him to be the answer down low, they're in for a big disappointment.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

Without getting into yet another Walker thread that has been done many many many times...here's what on think on that list and Walker in general.

His talent level is pretty much equal to above most of those guys on the list. But Walker wants to be more than he is and tries to be more than he is. So getting a guy with less "talent" but is a roll player and happy to play a roll as opposed to being the star or one of the stars - in my opinion is much more preferable to Walker. A guy willing to play atround 25-30 minutes and grab rebounds and get some garbage points would be very nice.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Antoine Walker is more talented than everyone on the list. Some might say that SAR is a better offensive player, but Walker is atleast above-average in defense, something you cannot say about SAR.


----------



## MacDanny 6 (Jun 7, 2002)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> how bout those magic huh???...what a great team ...tony battie is much better than walker


How bout those Celtics. #3 seed and lose in the first round to a depleted team. Nice one guy, nice one.


----------



## MacDanny 6 (Jun 7, 2002)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> tony battie is much better than walker


I agree


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> Walker is garbage. I would take any of those players on the list except Gadzuric over Walker. I would try everything possible just to keep Walker off my team.


Of course, that's your opinion, and I'm not going to say you are wrong. Let's compare, shall we?

Antoine Walker (Career): 38.8mpg, 19.8ppg, 8.70rpg, 4.1apg, 1.39spg, 3.15tpg, .415 shooting, .326 3PT

*Pros:* Works with young guys well, handles criticism, can do little things for the club, good passer for a big, always gives 100%.
*Cons:*Shoots too much, bad basketball IQ, hurts team by taking too many shots.

Keith Van Horn (Career): 32.7mpg, 16.7ppg, 7.10rpg, 1.7apg, .84spg, 2.28topg, .444 shooting, .360 3PT

*Pros:*Can space the floor, good shooting touch, five years ago he could hit the boards.
*Cons:*SOFT. Hasn't averaged over 12ppg in the last 3 years. Hasn't boarded over 5 per in the last 3 years.

I give advantage to Walker in this scenario.

Antoine Walker vs.

Kwame Brown (Career): 22.7mpg, 7.7ppg, 5.50rpg, 1.0apg, .62spg, 1.42tpg, .455 shooting, .167 3PT

*Pros:*Has shown flashes of being a very good player in this league. Flashes- not seasons of solid play like AW.
*Cons:*Gave up on his team during the playoff run. Has a reputation as being soft. Has proven nothing in this league.

I give advantage to Walker.

When I feel like it I'll show both statistically and rationally that Walker tools Haslem and Swift. Only player close to Walker on that list is SAR.

On a related note, I now hate you for making me defend Antoine freaking Walker.


----------



## TONYALLEN42 (Jan 24, 2005)

Franco 5 said:


> How bout those Celtics. #3 seed and lose in the first round to a depleted team. Nice one guy, nice one.


well they did make the playoffs... the magic on the other hand... i think ill take what i got.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

P-Dub34 said:


> On a related note, I now hate you for making me defend Antoine freaking Walker.


:rotf:

You and me both.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The problem with Walker my entire time watching his career is shot selection. He has no concept of what a good shot is or a bad shot. He just shoots and shoots and shoots with no conscious of whether or not he's in the flow. He also dribbles too much. Man, if he used the BBall IQ he possesses and use his talents as a facillitator of a team and play a role, rather than wanting to be a "Star," this man could have been one of the most invaluable players in the NBA.

I wouldn't want Walker in this capacity. When he's in his 30's and finally realizes that he doesn't need to be the star and shoot so damn much, I might take a flyer on him. He's a career 41% shooter. Goodness.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

I've been saying the exact same thing for years.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

Dear Walker haters,

Saying Antoine is better than someone who he is better than does not mean that we're going to revoke your Walker Hater Membership Card. It does, however, mean that we are not going to issue you a Blind Moron Membership Card. I hope this is acceptable to you all.

Sincerely,
Walker Fans.


----------



## HawksFan8 (Apr 21, 2005)

HKF said:


> The problem with Walker my entire time watching his career is shot selection. He has no concept of what a good shot is or a bad shot. He just shoots and shoots and shoots with no conscious of whether or not he's in the flow. He also dribbles too much. Man, if he used the BBall IQ he possesses and use his talents as a facillitator of a team and play a role, rather than wanting to be a "Star," this man could have been one of the most invaluable players in the NBA.
> 
> I wouldn't want Walker in this capacity. When he's in his 30's and finally realizes that he doesn't need to be the star and shoot so damn much, I might take a flyer on him. He's a career 41% shooter. Goodness.


This from a Kobe Bryant fan? Talk to me when he gets the best player in the NBA traded away from his team because he hates sharing the spotlight then you might have an actual point.

I am not sure where this Antoine Walker isn't a team player baloney comes from because it just isn't the truth.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Franco 5 said:


> How bout those Celtics. #3 seed and lose in the first round to a depleted team. Nice one guy, nice one.



i hope ur happy in the lottery for the next 4 years


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

HawksFan8 said:


> This from a Kobe Bryant fan? Talk to me when he gets the best player in the NBA traded away from his team because he hates sharing the spotlight then you might have an actual point.
> 
> I am not sure where this Antoine Walker isn't a team player baloney comes from because it just isn't the truth.


I've been watching Antoine since he's been at Kentucky. Last I checked Kobe has been on title winning teams as a key contributor (coming through the west). Me being a Kobe fan has nothing to do with me talking about Walker. I didn't say Antoine wasn't a team player. I said he has horrible shot selection which he does.

Explain 41% from the field. Damn fanboys.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

HKF said:


> Explain 41% from the field. Damn fanboys.



Ask allen iverson





and NO im not comparing walker to iverson...but i think fg% can be a little overrated with a difference of 41 to 44 (which is considered good)...thats what one extra fg made a game? i dont see a big difference from 10-25 or 11-25


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Iverson is a PG/SG. Walker was a PF for the majority of his career. C'mon. It's the same reason why I'm not a big fan of Jermaine O'Neal. Power Fowards should never shoot under 47% from the field.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

HKF said:


> Iverson is a PG/SG. Walker was a PF for the majority of his career. C'mon. It's the same reason why I'm not a big fan of Jermaine O'Neal. Power Fowards should never shoot under 47% from the field.



Dirk...JO...zach randolph...carlos boozer...antawn jamison...chris webber....all shot under 47%...is that a list of bad pfs???


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Do any of them shoot as poorly as Walker?


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

HKF said:


> Do any of them shoot as poorly as Walker?



all within 3.5%


BUT antoine shot OVER 44% from the field in his stint with the celts this past season...which is 2% higher than what his season stats would say for 04-05...i mean cmon he had to take every shot in atlanta i dont really count that...so in my opinion this season he shot over 44%


----------



## ZWW (Jan 17, 2004)

Antoine Walker is not as bad as some people are making him out to be and he's just as good as ANYONE on that list. Plain and simple.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

agoo101284 said:


> Dear Walker haters,
> 
> Saying Antoine is better than someone who he is better than does not mean that we're going to revoke your Walker Hater Membership Card. It does, however, mean that we are not going to issue you a Blind Moron Membership Card. I hope this is acceptable to you all.
> 
> ...



:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Good one Agoo :clap:


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

agoo101284 said:


> Dear Walker haters,
> 
> Saying Antoine is better than someone who he is better than does not mean that we're going to revoke your Walker Hater Membership Card. It does, however, mean that we are not going to issue you a Blind Moron Membership Card. I hope this is acceptable to you all.
> 
> ...


He is more talented than many players. Unfortunately he is also dumber and has a bigger ego and a smaller hoops IQ. That makes him worse. Therefore I'd take any guy on the above list over Walker.

I hope this is acceptable to you.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Your Blind Moron Membership Card is in the mail. :biggrin:


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

Ehhhh Causeway I agree with you on most Walker issues...but taking guys like Van Horn and Haslem (who probably won't be half as good w/o Shaq beside him) is just nuts.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

I hear you P-Dub. I am in no way saying I am a big fan of either Van Horn or Haslem. And no doubt Haslem has benefited greatly from having Shaq next to him. But the point is that we need a roll player in that spot. A guy who knows his strengths and more importantly his weaknesses. A guy willing to play limited minutes and get limited touches and shots. Walker is not at all that guy. If we could UPGRADE on Walkers talent than all the shots and touches Walker gets going to someone new would be fine. Otherwise we need a roll guy.

ehmunro you are quick with your little one liners and clearly humor yourself - but I did not take what you had to say seriously before and even less so now.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

That's fine, because I've yet to see a post from you that I could take seriously at all. That's not to say that they don't exist, I just haven't run across one yet.

EDIT: Basketball & the Celtics.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> That's fine, because I've yet to see a post from you that I could take seriously at all. That's not to say that they don't exist, I just haven't run across one yet.


Yet another witty post from ehmunro. EDIT. Thanks for the input.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> EDIT: Basketball & the Celtics.



:rofl: hahahahhahahaa


sorry this has nothing to do with the thread but i found that very amusing


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

Causeway said:


> He is more talented than many players. Unfortunately he is also dumber and has a bigger ego and a smaller hoops IQ. That makes him worse. Therefore I'd take any guy on the above list over Walker.
> 
> I hope this is acceptable to you.


There is no possible way that you can justify taking Kwame Brown, Dan Gadzuric, or Keith Van Horn over Antoine Walker.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> There is no possible way that you can justify taking Kwame Brown


You could use the "potential" argument with Kwame. KVH and Gadzuric, nothing can be said.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:
 

> You could use the "potential" argument with Kwame. KVH and Gadzuric, nothing can be said.




kwame is potentialy a 10-6 guy...thats all the potential he has...cmon its been 4 yrs how long can u give the kid


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> kwame is potentialy a 10-6 guy...thats all the potential he has...cmon its been 4 yrs how long can u give the kid



If Brown went to and stayed in college, he would have been in this draft as a senior. I think the potential argument applies, however, where is his head?


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> You could use the "potential" argument with Kwame. KVH and Gadzuric, nothing can be said.


Kwame is still very young. He still has a shot.

KVH in 04-05: 11.2 PPG, 4.7 RPG, 1,2 APG with a 45% FG in about 24 minutes per game.

Gadzuric in 04-05: 7.3 PPG, 8.3 RPG, 0.4 RPG with a 53% FG in 22 minutes per game _in his third season_.

I'd be happy with those numbers at that spot.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

If Gadzuric was better than Antoine, he would be getting more than twenty-two minutes per game for the worst team in the league. Also, KVH and Gadzuric are *awful* at defense. Gadzuric cannot score and KVH cannot rebound.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> Kwame is still very young. He still has a shot.
> 
> KVH in 04-05: 11.2 PPG, 4.7 RPG, 1,2 APG with a 45% FG in about 24 minutes per game.
> 
> ...




i agree...id be happy with those numbers at that spot as well...unless i already had a pf on my team who gave me 20ppg, 9rpg and 4 ast...big deal he'll miss an extra 2 or 3 shots cuz his fg% is lower...kvh or gadzurich dont deserve to be in the same breath as antoine walker


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

Premier said:


> If Gadzuric was better than Antoine, he would be getting more than twenty-two minutes per game for the worst team in the league. Also, KVH and Gadzuric are *awful* at defense. Gadzuric cannot score and KVH cannot rebound.


Once again...I do not think Gadzuric is "better" than Walker. But I do think he is better FOR THE CELTICS. He is a solid roll player and seems to be happy to be a roll player. That is what we need.



#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> i agree...id be happy with those numbers at that spot as well...unless i already had a pf on my team who gave me 20ppg, 9rpg and 4 ast...big deal he'll miss an extra 2 or 3 shots cuz his fg% is lower...kvh or gadzurich dont deserve to be in the same breath as antoine walker


Big deal that "he'll miss an extra 2 or 3 shots cuz his fg% is lower"? It's not a small deal IMO. Walker takes too many shots to get his 20 and is not efficient. 

Look - clearly I am in the minority on Walker in general and in this thread. But I am a Celtics fan first. I would trade anyone for anyone IF I thought it would make the Celtics a better team. Walker needs too many minutes and too many touches and too many shots at a low % for this team. We have AJ that should be about a 20 minute guy next season. We need another roll player. Will that guy have less "talent" than Walker? Yes. And the Celtics will be better off for it.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Once again I will ask, no one ever answers this question, but what importance does FG% play when you can't win?


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

aquaitious said:


> Once again I will ask, no one ever answers this question, but what importance does FG% play when you can't win?


It ain't worth ****.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> Once again I will ask, no one ever answers this question, but what importance does FG% play when you can't win?


are you saying there is not a correlation between FG% and winning?


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Causeway said:


> are you saying there is not a correlation between FG% and winning?


Is it the only thing?

Better FG% does not equal a better team nor more wins.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Causeway said:


> We need another roll player. Will that guy have less "talent" than Walker? Yes. And the Celtics will be better off for it.


You keep mentioning these "roll players" and seem to associate them with Keith van Horn. So I'm guessing that a "roll player" is a player that rolls over and plays dead on the defensive end of the floor? The absolute _last_ thing Boston needs is another softer than warm cookie dough C/PF. They're already loaded at that position with Raef & Blount.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> You keep mentioning these "roll players" and seem to associate them with Keith van Horn. So I'm guessing that a "roll player" is a player that rolls over and plays dead on the defensive end of the floor? The absolute _last_ thing Boston needs is another softer than warm cookie dough C/PF. They're already loaded at that position with Raef & Blount.


witty again. maybe there's a stand-up comedy Celtics board somewhere? 

I have never brought up Van Horn before this thread. If you go back and read the thread you'll see it was part of the first post in here on an article.

To be honest I have never been a big fan of Van Horns. I know we can do better. I believe Ainge can and will do better. However for arguments sake and related to this thread - I do think KVH is better for the Celtics than Walker. Van Horn has always blown at defense - no argument there. But I would not compare him to Blount. Blount just has no heart. He showed in his contract season he has the talent. But he has no heart or desire or balls.

Raef actually is not a bad defender and can block shots. 

Walker is a monster defender? I don't think so. He does play hard - no question. But again- he requires too many minutes and has too many holes in his brain.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Causeway said:


> However for arguments sake and related to this thread - I do think KVH is better for the Celtics than Walker. Van Horn has always blown at defense - no argument there. But I would not compare him to Blount. Blount just has no heart. He showed in his contract season he has the talent. But he has no heart or desire or balls.


I wouldn't compare KvH to Blount either, because it's an insult to Bluntman. And I _hate_ Blount. KvH's only skills are all replicated by Raef, only he's half as good and lacks Raef's BBIQ. He's a JiriWelsch level scrub whose contract year heroics & skin colour landed him a max deal. I wish Dallas well with him. He seriously belongs in the Greater Albuquerque Recreational League. And even there middle aged fat guys would outrebound him.



Causeway said:


> Raef actually is not a bad defender and can block shots.


Raef no longer has the lift he once did, his shotblocking ain't what it used to be. And he's a poor straight up defender, it's his off the ball D that earned him his rep, and as I noted, it isn't what it used to be. He's serviceable, but that's about it.



Causeway said:


> Walker is a monster defender? I don't think so. He does play hard - no question. But again- he requires too many minutes and has too many holes in his brain.


Walker plays hard. That's his saving grace. Or part of it. He's also a refuse to lose type of guy, and expresses that more positively than Pierce (who's the same way). While Pierce's will to win can rub teammates the wrong way, Walker's seems somewhat infectious. That's about it for the positives. If I could replace him with Elton Brand I'd do it in a heartbeat.


----------



## BackwoodsBum (Jul 2, 2003)

Causeway said:


> We need another roll player. Will that guy have less "talent" than Walker? Yes. And the Celtics will be better off for it.


I'm afraid that kind of reasoning isn't going to win you any support here because that's exactly what I have been saying about Pierce. People forget that basketball is a team sport and there are VERY few players in this league that can single handedly carry a team. Pierce isn't one and neither is Walker. We've seen what can be done with them together and with Pierce alone and I for one am not satisfied with mediocrity. The Pistons proved last year that you don't have to have a "superstar" to win if you have players that play as a team. 

Back to the original topic. Talent wise I think Walker is as good or better than anyone on that list, and I think he has shown more heart than most of those guys, but I don't know if he would be willing to play a reduced role and that is what I think he will need to do if he resigns with the C's. 

I like Haslem and think he would be a nice fit on the C's, but he's a completely different type of player than Walker so it's hard to compare them. Gadzuric would be a nice role player but again he would not be expected to "replace" Walker because that's not his game. SAR would be the closest thing to Walker as far as talent and style of play, but I don't see him as a significant upgrade and think he'll probably want more money anyway. 

I like a lot of the things Walker brings to the team and there are some things I don't like, but if he is willing to take a back seat to the kids and serve as a leader and a mentor than I think I would take him over anyone else on that list. If he wants to play to many minutes and is going to want to play out on the perimeter and jack up too many shots then let him do it elsewhere.


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> Walker plays hard. That's his saving grace. Or part of it. He's also a refuse to lose type of guy, and expresses that more positively than Pierce (who's the same way). While Pierce's will to win can rub teammates the wrong way, Walker's seems somewhat infectious. That's about it for the positives. *If I could replace him with Elton Brand I'd do it in a heartbeat*.


100%...agreed!


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> If I could replace him with Elton Brand I'd do it in a heartbeat.



of course anyone would agree with that...2 yrs ago danny offered the clippers antoine and our #1 pick...which turned out to be Al...for elton brand...did they do it??...NO theyd never do that cuz brand is a monster...we have nothing to give the clips for brand...thats almost like saying...if i could replace him with tim duncan id do it in a heartbeat


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> of course anyone would agree with that...2 yrs ago danny offered the clippers antoine and our #1 pick...which turned out to be Al...for elton brand...did they do it??...NO theyd never do that cuz brand is a monster...we have nothing to give the clips for brand...*thats almost like saying...if i could replace him with tim duncan id do it in a heartbeat*


I am a big fan of Brand - but he is not Tim Duncan. Duncan is one of the best PF's of all time.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> Raef no longer has the lift he once did, his shotblocking ain't what it used to be. And he's a poor straight up defender, it's his off the ball D that earned him his rep, and as I noted, it isn't what it used to be. He's serviceable, but that's about it.


Say what you will, but LaFrentz proved in the Indy series that he was capable of playing solid post defense against an elite (if hurting) PF like O'Neal (because God knows Walker wasn't doing it).


----------



## Causeway (May 18, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> Say what you will, but LaFrentz proved in the Indy series that he was capable of playing solid post defense against an elite (if hurting) PF like O'Neal (because God knows Walker wasn't doing it).


 :clap:


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Causeway said:


> I am a big fan of Brand - but he is not Tim Duncan. Duncan is one of the best PF's of all time.



im not comparing brand to duncan but im saying that brand is just as much of a dream as duncan is...duncans a better player but we arent getting either


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> The Pistons proved last year that you don't have to have a "superstar" to win if you have players that play as a team.


Whoa whoa whoa...hold the phone. You can't just throw five average players together and, even if they play well as a team, win championships. Detroit has 5 very good players (all 5 of which are better than any Celtic not named Paul Pierce). Billups was 17/6 while making an All-Defensive Team, Hamilton was 19/5 on 44% shooting, Prince 15/5 (and I believe made All-Defense...he should have if he didn't), Rasheed was 15/8 with 1.5bpg and Ben was 10/12 and the DPoY.

You make it sound like it's easy to throw 5 guys together, have 'em gel, and win a championship. Not one of these guys was under 15 a game, and all of them (excluding Rip) play excellent defense.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Also, it is _very _rare to have a championship team composed of five good players and *no* superstars. The only teams to accomplish this are the 1979 Sonics and the 2004 Pistons.


----------

