# Javaris Crittenton and Daequan Cook



## BigMac (Jan 14, 2005)

what do you guys think of these two? IS Crittenton going to be a PG/SG in the nba like Roy?


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

I think Daequan is a stud and will be much more of a threat offensively for OSU than Oden this year.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Crittenton is a PG. He's not a combo guard. He's a bigger more talented version of Jarrett Jack.


----------



## BigMac (Jan 14, 2005)

JAck going to be a solid PG in the future. So you think Crittenton has more talent then JAck man that very scary.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

BigMac said:


> JAck going to be a solid PG in the future. So you think Crittenton has more talent then JAck man that very scary.


Doesn't mean he'll be a better player. I just feel he has more God given ability. He's a very explosive kind of guy. If he becomes a distributor at the this level and beyond, he has Marbury-like offensive capabilities.


----------



## crazyfan (Dec 9, 2005)

Daequan Cook reminds me of Rashad McCants in his freshman year.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

Crittenton's a great player. GT had a fantastic 1-2 recruiting class last year. He's long and big for the 1, and has tremendous athletic ability. He's extremely quick for a 6'5 point. I feel he's still adapting to the pg position, he'll never be a pure point guard. He has unreal potential and he's fantastic physically. His shots improving, which is good. His size, speed and athleticism remind me of Francis. Their game, not entirely the same. As long as Crittenton stays agressive on the offensive end and improves his defense he'll be a big prospect. He's got all the tools to be a great lock-down defender. He can always improve his court vision too.

Crittenton is more talented than Jack. I won't be surprised if Crittenton turns into a great player, he has the work ethic and physical gift.

As for Cook, he's a straight up scorer. Only real comparison to Crittenton is size and draft class. Their games aren't similar.


----------



## WaterlooVikings (Oct 31, 2006)

i believe the bucks offense will go around daequan all yr... and i wouldnt be surprised to see him avg. 18-20 a game


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

WaterlooVikings said:


> i believe the bucks offense will go around daequan all yr... and i wouldnt be surprised to see him avg. 18-20 a game



Ron Lewis will be the focal point of the O, he will lead the team in scoring.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

Haven't seen much of Cook, but Javaris looks like a very interesting prospect.


----------



## paintingshade (Nov 16, 2006)

I'm a big Crittenton fan, though cook is an unbelievable talent. I just think Crittenton will be better.


----------



## crazyfan (Dec 9, 2005)

Crittenton's got that special talent at his size to be really good in the league while Cook is a good scorer but those sort of players are certainly not lacking in the league.

He will be a first rounder but not a superstar.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

Crittenton had a great game against G State. So did Thad Young. Those two are a heck of a lot of perimeter talent, GT had a great recruitment 1-2. Best in the nation.


----------



## paintingshade (Nov 16, 2006)

Point Guards: 
1. OJ Mayo 
2. Derrick Rose
3. Javaris Crittenton
4. Wayne Ellington
5. Tyreke Evens 

ShootingGuards:	
1. Bill Walker
2. Eric Gordon
3. Daequan Cook
4. Marcus Williams 
5. Sun Yue

Small Forwards:	
1. Kevin Durant
2. Thaddeus Young 
3. Yi Jianlian
4. Corey Brewer
5. Nicolas Batum

Power Forwards:
1. Josh McRoberts
2. Joakim Noah
3. Tyler Hansbrough
4. Michael Beasley
5. Brandan Wright

Centers: 
1. Greg Oden
2. Hasheem Thabeet
3. Roy Hibbert
4. Ante Tomic
5. Aaron Gray


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

Bill Walker should not be ahead of Daequan Cook, Eric Gordon, or Marcus Williams. Walker has no range. He desperately needs 2 years of college ball.


----------



## NetsFan (Aug 9, 2005)

> Walker has no range


what do you mean walker has no range, you must be talking about when walker was a sphomore or junior in high school. Walker has shown that he can hit the 3, and has shown that he is developing a pull up jumper


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

NetsFan said:


> what do you mean walker has no range, you must be talking about when walker was a sphomore or junior in high school. Walker has shown that he can hit the 3, and has shown that he is developing a pull up jumper



I am talking about when Walker was a sophomore and junior in High School because those are his last 2 basketball seasons in which I've watched him live numerous times.


----------



## paintingshade (Nov 16, 2006)

I'm banking on him devoloping a jumper. I think he will, he has a big motive to become great. he has the most potential, and in the long run I just seem him being the best out of those guys.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

NetsFan said:


> what do you mean walker has no range, you must be talking about when walker was a sphomore or junior in high school. Walker has shown that he can hit the 3, and has shown that he is developing a pull up jumper


You do realize that Bill Walker didn't play his Senior year, right?

His shot isn't anything to write home about. It's getting better, as is his ball handling, but it's not at where it needs to be yet.


----------



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

Which senior year are we talking about? I thought he was disqualified for already having played four years of high school ball?


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

paintingshade said:


> Point Guards:
> 1. OJ Mayo
> 2. Derrick Rose
> 3. Javaris Crittenton
> ...




feel free to insert Chase Budinger at the top of the shooting guard list and Spencer Hawes at either 2 or 3 on your center list, what is there a pac-10 boycott in here?


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

rainman said:


> feel free to insert Chase Budinger at the top of the shooting guard list and Spencer Hawes at either 2 or 3 on your center list, what is there a pac-10 boycott in here?



Budinger should definitely be in the top 3 of the small forwards.


Daequan was SICK tonight, 22 pts on 10-13 from the field. He has Ray Allen-like smoothness.


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

paintingshade said:


> I'm banking on him devoloping a jumper. I think he will, he has a big motive to become great. he has the most potential, and in the long run I just seem him being the best out of those guys.



He would have to develop and unreal jumper to pass Gordon or Cook, they are both head and shoulders above Walker right now as far as actual basketball skills. Right now Walker is just a big time athlete. Cook has NBA range already and Gordon has a nice shot to go along with Steve Francis like athleticism.

Walker is a guy that I'm gonna be locked in on once he starts playing this year, I'm very curious as to how well he plays this year.


----------



## paintingshade (Nov 16, 2006)

ok I overlooked budinger, but hawes doesn't impress me. 

Point Guards:
1. OJ Mayo
2. Derrick Rose
3. Javaris Crittenton
4. Wayne Ellington
5. Tyreke Evens

ShootingGuards:
1. Bill Walker
2. Eric Gordon
3. Daequan Cook
4. Marcus Williams
5. Sun Yue

Small Forwards:
1. Kevin Durant
2. Thaddeus Young
3. Chase Budinger
4. Yi Jianlian
5. Corey Brewer

Power Forwards:
1. Josh McRoberts
2. Joakim Noah
3. Tyler Hansbrough
4. Michael Beasley
5. Brandan Wright

Centers:
1. Greg Oden
2. Hasheem Thabeet
3. Roy Hibbert
4. Ante Tomic
5. Aaron Gray


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

bostonwr said:


> Bill Walker should not be ahead of Daequan Cook, Eric Gordon, or Marcus Williams. Walker has no range. He desperately needs 2 years of college ball.


And neither one of them have Bill Walkers rebounding abilities or his shot blocking skills.


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

bostonwr said:


> Bill Walker should not be ahead of Daequan Cook, Eric Gordon, or Marcus Williams. Walker has no range. He desperately needs 2 years of college ball.


He has something the others don't and thats world class athleticism.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

I dunno about Eric Gordon but I'd have Bill Walker over D.Cook
Cook is only like 6'2 and he has much better shooting than Walker
but thats about the only thing he has on Walker

I think D.Rose is the best prospect overall and I think Michael Beasley should be higher on the list too


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

fjkdsi said:


> I dunno about Eric Gordon but I'd have Bill Walker over D.Cook
> Cook is only like 6'2 and he has much better shooting than Walker
> but thats about the only thing he has on Walker
> 
> I think D.Rose is the best prospect overall and I think Michael Beasley should be higher on the list too



Cook is actually closer to 6'4-6'5. He's a much better scorer than Walker, he's got much better handles, and he's a better passer. He's also a solid rebounder.


I'll take basketball players over athletes any day of the week. It's an easy pick right now between Cook and Walker, it's Cook hands down.

Taking Walker over Cook is like taking Gerald Wallace over Ray Allen.


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> And neither one of them have Bill Walkers rebounding abilities or his shot blocking skills.



And none of those guys play Power Forward or Center so I don't see how that's much of a factor.


----------



## NetsFan (Aug 9, 2005)

why would want your gaurds to be good rebounders to makin more verstatile

Bill has shown that his offense and wants his offense game to be nowhere near Gerald wallaces. Bill can actually hit free throws unlike wallace


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

bostonwr said:


> And none of those guys play Power Forward or Center so I don't see how that's much of a factor.


Its a factor because you are not talking about all around game, just the selective points that make your argument for the other two players, ie jumpshot and passing. It's quite simple.


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Its a factor because you are not talking about all around game, just the selective points that make your argument for the other two players, ie jumpshot and passing. It's quite simple.



That's great but I don't see how Walker pulling an extra 2 boards and 1 blocked shot per game is going to outweigh the scoring that a guy like Cook can provide.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

bostonwr said:


> That's great but I don't see how Walker pulling an extra 2 boards and 1 blocked shot per game is going to outweigh the scoring that a guy like Cook can provide.


try about 4 boards and 2 blocks a game more, and whoever said Cook is a better scorer than Bill?


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> try about 4 boards and 2 blocks a game more, and whoever said Cook is a better scorer than Bill?



Are you seriously using High School stats to try and prove a point? :rotf: I know a kid playing D2 college basketball that averaged 38 PPG in High School. When Bill Walker pulls 4 boards and 2 blocks more per game than Cook at the college level come talk to me. 


You're absolutely on crack if you think Walker is a better scorer than Cook. Look up scorer in the dictionary and it will say: See Daequan Cook. You really just lost all credibility by even insinuating that Walker is in the same realm as Cook offensively.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

bostonwr said:


> Are you seriously using High School stats to try and prove a point? :rotf: I know a kid playing D2 college basketball that averaged 38 PPG in High School. When Bill Walker pulls 4 boards and 2 blocks more per game than Cook at the college level come talk to me.
> 
> 
> You're absolutely on crack if you think Walker is a better scorer than Cook. Look up scorer in the dictionary and it will say: See Daequan Cook. You really just lost all credibility by even insinuating that Walker is in the same realm as Cook offensively.


Losing credibility from Daequan Cook's secret stalker/serious case of man love is the least of my worries. I was never using high school stats to compare them. Walker will get 4 more boards and 2 more blocks a game than Cook. Bank on it. Where did I ever bring up high school stats son?


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Losing credibility from Daequan Cook's secret stalker/serious case of man love is the least of my worries. I was never using high school stats to compare them. Walker will get 4 more boards and 2 more blocks a game than Cook. Bank on it. Where did I ever bring up high school stats son?



I want this in writing, that Bill Walker will pull 10 boards per game this year, please respond stating that this is what you're saying.


I still would LOVE an explanation on why you think Walker is a better scorer than a guy currently averaging 18 PPG in 23 minutes per game. 

Handles? Cook by a mile

3-ball? Cook by a mile

Mid-range? Cook by a mile

Hell Cook can even back people down and hit a fadeaway or a runner, neither of which is something Walker excels at.


The only man crush here is the one you got on Bill Walker and every other super athletic wingman that doesn't excel at any particular basketball skill that is required to be a good NBA player.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> try about 4 boards and 2 blocks a game more, and whoever said Cook is a better scorer than Bill?


There is no way that Walker is the better scorer. Cook's offensive game is far more advanced, and doesn't have a heavy dependency on athleticism. I don't think any expert would disagree that right now Cook is the better scorer.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> There is no way that Walker is the better scorer. Cook's offensive game is far more advanced, and doesn't have a heavy dependency on athleticism. I don't think any expert would disagree that right now Cook is the better scorer.


You guys make it sound like having and using athleticism is something that is bad. Who gives a damn if he gets his points flying above the rim or hitting mid range jumpers. Last time I checked it's a lot easier to teach a guy how to hit a 15 footer than it is to show him how to jump 45 inches off the ground.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> You guys make it sound like having and using athleticism is something that is bad. Who gives a damn if he gets his points flying above the rim or hitting mid range jumpers. Last time I checked it's a lot easier to teach a guy how to hit a 15 footer than it is to show him how to jump 45 inches off the ground.


Sure. Besides that jumping 45'' has nothing to do with being able to score. A solid 15 footer results in 2 points. A 45'' vertical helps you in the high jump.


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> Sure. Besides that jumping 45'' has nothing to do with being able to score. A solid 15 footer results in 2 points. A 45'' vertical helps you in the high jump.


BINGO.

The point is, you can put up 20 per game on pure athleticism in High School, you can't do that in college and especially in the pros. If scoring was based on just pure athletic ability, Stromile Swift would be an all-star.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> Sure. Besides that jumping 45'' has nothing to do with being able to score. A solid 15 footer results in 2 points. A 45'' vertical helps you in the high jump.


And in getting put backs, offensive rebounds, layups over people that are taller, dunks over people that are taller, but you're right it doesn't help you at scoring at all. :rotf:


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> And in getting put backs, offensive rebounds, layups over people that are taller, dunks over people that are taller, but you're right it doesn't help you at scoring at all. :rotf:


Anybody with a 30'' vertical can do those things too. They're all worth 2 points (besides that offensive rebound you threw in). A 15 foot jumper which keeps the defense honest is just as useful.

Ask James White how his athleticism has helped him. Bill Walker probably won't turn out the same way, but athleticism is no more useful than a 15 foot jumper.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> Anybody with a 30'' vertical can do those things too. They're all worth 2 points (besides that offensive rebound you threw in). A 15 foot jumper which keeps the defense honest is just as useful.
> 
> Ask James White how his athleticism has helped him. Bill Walker probably won't turn out the same way, but athleticism is no more useful than a 15 foot jumper.


I never said it was more useful, I'm just saying that they are both useful.

And no, a guy with a 30 inch vertical cannot jump over guys and dunk it or jump over guys for tip ins. That James White comparison is kinda pointless. Him and Walker have very little in common besides that they both can jump.


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> I never said it was more useful, I'm just saying that they are both useful.
> 
> And no, a guy with a 30 inch vertical cannot jump over guys and dunk it or jump over guys for tip ins. That James White comparison is kinda pointless. Him and Walker have very little in common besides that they both can jump.



You're right, White has a better jump shot.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

bostonwr said:


> You're right, White has a better jump shot.


In your completely biased opinion. Since you seem to have some personal hatred for everything about Bill Walker. What's the matter kid? Did he not sign an autograph for you after the games you went to? lol


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> In your completely biased opinion. Since you seem to have some personal hatred for everything about Bill Walker. What's the matter kid? Did he not sign an autograph for you after the games you went to? lol



There no bias against Bill Walker, loved watching him in High School (something you didn't do). I just don't feel the need to tout him as the next big thing when there are lots of players that are more developed at this point. When you're the only one arguing for Walker being a better scorer than a guy like Cook the light should go on that you're probably making a fool out of yourself.


----------



## bostonwr (Oct 15, 2006)

I still wanna see you repeat your claim that Bill Walker is going to average 10 boards per game this year. That was a gem of a post.


----------

