# Bonzi wells interview - he talks about Portland media



## onetwo88 (Jul 16, 2002)

http://www.insidehoops.com/wells-interview-012706.shtml


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> Once they got me and Rasheed [Wallace] out of there, it's like, downhill. So I bet if they could do it over again they'd go ahead and just embrace our team and hopefully just let us continue to win 50-plus games like we did every year.


Yeah, continue to win 50 games . . . and continue to make fools of yourselves and the team. No thanks.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Once a idiot...still a idiot....always a......


----------



## Goldmember (May 24, 2003)

Once that team lost Pippen and Sabonis they weren't a 50 win team anymore.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

if we could swap Theo Ratliff for Rasheed Wallace AND Bonzi Wells right now, would we win 50 games? 

Blake/Bonzi/Miles (or Patterson)/Randolph/Sheed. that'd be a pretty darned fun team to watch, IMO. 

50 wins? I don't know. a playoff team, though.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

I agree with Bonzi. Personally, if that roster would win 50+ games a year I would want them back. But I don't remember Bonzi ever being a big part. He had potential and could dominate on occasion. To me it was Sheed, Pippen, Sabas, and Damon (not trying to start a debate) as the core group. Bonzi was always on the verge but his attitude never allowed him to become a consistent contributor.

That is just my recollection off the top of my head.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Bonzi was never the same after the knee injury.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

hasoos said:


> Bonzi was never the same after the knee injury.


wasn't his best year the year after his knee injury?

Bonzi was never the same once he got his contract.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Hap said:


> wasn't his best year the year after his knee injury?
> 
> Bonzi was never the same once he got his contract.


Statistically because he got more minutes. But his shooting percentage actually went down I believe. The beginning of the end if you will. :biggrin:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

hasoos said:


> Statistically because he got more minutes. But his shooting percentage actually went down I believe. The beginning of the end if you will. :biggrin:


I see


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Bonzi and Sheed aren't leaders, so I can't imagine them doing anything to be considered a thing of greatness.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

SheedSoNasty said:


> Bonzi and Sheed aren't leaders, so I can't imagine them doing anything to be considered a thing of greatness.


No need to imagine in Sheed's case.

Just ask to see his jewelry.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

MARIS61 said:


> No need to imagine in Sheed's case.
> 
> Just ask to see his jewelry.


I guess Karl Malone didn't have greatness. :biggrin:

and in an attempt to hopefully end the typical sheed/bonzi posts we get that go no where...enjoy this song



> I remember when I was a lad
> Times were hard and things were bad
> But there's a silver linin' behind ev'ry cloud
> Just four people that 's all we were
> ...


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

I really do find it sad that someone so lacking in intelligence is making so much money. Ugh.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Whatever your issues are about the "morality" side of things, and whatever the future may hold potential-wise, I hope nobody here is under any delusion that this current team, right now as is, could win even 1 out of 10 games against the team we had before Nash Patterson came to town.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Geez, feel the love...



hasoos said:


> Bonzi was never the same after the knee injury.


completely agree. Prior to the injury, I greeted him coming into the game by declaring to whoever was with me that it was _Bonzi Time!_ and more times then not he'd just destroy... making play after play... shades of Billy Ray. 

I'm not sure if it was ever _Bonzi Time!_ again post injury. His D and outside the paint game were decent to good, but definitely not what made him special (IMO). I'd never heard the term _power guard_ before, but it perfectly reflected his game. Constantly attacking the hoop. Too strong for the swing players, too fast for the bigs. Just vicious. Post knee injury, he couldn't slash at will and compete inside like before. Instead of bouncing he had to gather himself like most everyone else. 

Too bad and oh well... I started calling for the club to trade him after it became clear to me that he was damaged goods. IMO his now more deliberate inside game was a poor fit with some of the other set pieces on the club (Zack and Rube) which was just bad luck. It takes a lot of good luck to make it through years of competitive hoop without sustaining some sort of deabilitating injury. I don't necessarily think it's the good guys that avoid injury... it's the lucky few.

In this article he seemed (to me) to be open and pretty spot on about a number of things... and hardly and idiot. I totally agree with his assessment of Peja and projecting him to succeed in Indi next to Jermaine. The Portland media sucks? Really? No bleep? At least he didn't name names... though it's not like he needs to.

STOMP


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

MARIS61 said:


> No need to imagine in Sheed's case.
> 
> Just ask to see his jewelry.


He said as a leader, he's great when he doesn't have to carry the main load, but I sure wouldn't want him on this team. I can't imagine him doing the work like Nate demands.

As others said once Sabonis and Pippen was gone it was over.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

theWanker said:


> if we could swap Theo Ratliff for Rasheed Wallace AND Bonzi Wells right now, would we win 50 games?
> 
> Blake/Bonzi/Miles (or Patterson)/Randolph/Sheed. that'd be a pretty darned fun team to watch, IMO.
> 
> 50 wins? I don't know. a playoff team, though.


what if in addition you trade Dale Davis and change for... oh I don't know... Baron Davis? 

Baron, Bonzi, Miles, Randolph, Wallace

50+ wins? Easy. Fun to watch? Sure... but of course we wouldn't be treated to the fun we're having watching ex-Wizard backups hooping with some the better just out of HS players of Portland's rookies actully possibly develope... 

STOMP


----------



## el_Diablo (May 15, 2003)

STOMP said:


> what if you trade Dale Davis and change for... oh I don't know... Baron Davis?
> 
> Baron, Bonzi, Miles, Randolph, Wallace
> 
> ...


:dead:


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

Bonzi is right in this one thing. Winning > Everything else.

But I don't necessarily think that Bonzi is a winner. Sheed might be considered a winner because he won a championship. If we had kept those two maybe we'd still be a playoff team. What can you do? Nobody ever said rebuilding would be easy.


----------



## endora60 (Jan 5, 2006)

MARIS61 said:


> No need to imagine in Sheed's case.
> 
> Just ask to see his jewelry.


His jewelry doesn't make him a leader. (Think: Toni Kukoc, Derek Fisher, etc.) Even in Detroit it's understood he wants to be a secondary option, doesn't want to be thought of as any sort of leader...and that's cool. At least he understands himself and knows the situation in which he'll be happiest--and it wasn't in Portland as somebody people looked to for decisions and leadership.

:::shrug::::To each his own.

Laurie


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> Whatever your issues are about the "morality" side of things, and whatever the future may hold potential-wise, I hope nobody here is under any delusion that this current team, right now as is, could win even 1 out of 10 games against the team we had before Nash Patterson came to town.


Who cares? That other team lost in the first round of the playoffs year after year, and they choked against the Lakers in 2000. I think our team now has more heart and more character.


----------



## CatchNRelease (Jan 2, 2003)

I don't want to re-hash the Wells/Wallace debate. But, I don't agree with the lineups listing Wallace at center. If Wallace would have played center/bu center when he was here, it just might have given us a shot at a title.

He played very little center here, except for the short time before they dumped him. He doesn't like the contact of playing the C spot. (A good part of why he like to play the perimeter, when he was nearly unstoppable in the post.) Why would you think that he would willingly play center if he was still here?

Go Blazers


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

CatchNRelease said:


> I don't want to re-hash the Wells/Wallace debate.


Then why do it? 



> but I don't agree with the lineups listing Wallace at center. If Wallace would have played center/bu center when he was here, it just might have given us a shot at a title.
> 
> He played very little center here, except for the short time before they dumped him. He doesn't like the contact of playing the C spot. (A good part of why he like to play the perimeter, when he was nearly unstoppable in the post.) Why would you think that he would willingly play center if he was still here?


Because as a Blazer and now a Piston he's played where ever his coach needed him to from the 3-5? Sure he's great on the low block, but any player without outside shooters to support them is much less effective down there. Wallace was easily one of Portland's best outside threats, and they had several other players (Zach, Dale, Ruben, Wells) who only did well in the paint. 

IMO being listed as a center is mostly about who a player matches up with on D. Besides _"the short time before they dumped him"_ he'd guarded all sorts of low post bangers in the regular season and the playoffs, and thats what he's been doing in Detroit since as well. Shaq, Duncan, Ming, ect... I could site specific games if you like.

STOMP


----------



## blue32 (Jan 13, 2006)

Sheed's the man, nuff said. His stroke is awesome. His attitude on the court is what Blake and Viktor need! Fire! Beat those crappy ref's up! 2-goal tendings by Seattle back to back uncalled? Come on! Sheed be over there busting them up! get 'er done!



I miss sheed as a blazer...


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

There are times when I miss Sheed, but I never miss Bonzi. When Sheed was traded I felt it was time but felt his loss. When Bonzi was traded it was the way you feel when you've just taken a good dump, pardon the vulgarity. Relieved and a lot better.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

crandc said:


> There are times when I miss Sheed, but I never miss Bonzi. When Sheed was traded I felt it was time but felt his loss. When Bonzi was traded it was the way you feel when you've just taken a good dump, pardon the vulgarity. Relieved and a lot better.


as a man, I must say....good analogy for Bonzi.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

crandc said:


> There are times when I miss Sheed, but I never miss Bonzi. When Sheed was traded I felt it was time but felt his loss. When Bonzi was traded it was the way you feel when you've just taken a good dump, pardon the vulgarity. Relieved and a lot better.


Yeh a dump that requires a courtesy flush halfway through because it's so damn stinky!

I would have taken anything for Bonzi when we traded him...so glad to see him gone and I know I will never miss him.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

MARIS61 said:


> Whatever your issues are about the "morality" side of things, and whatever the future may hold potential-wise, I hope nobody here is under any delusion that this current team, right now as is, could win even 1 out of 10 games against the team we had before Nash Patterson came to town.


True, but of course change is a constant... it's near impossible to stay the same. 

I think that better overall talent evaluation and cap management could have helped this inevitable change be for a whole lot brighter future then what they've been able to achieve so far. Management's actions do not inspire much hope in me that they'll choose correctly at the next crossroads.

STOMP


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

STOMP said:


> True, but of course change is a constant... it's near impossible to stay the same.
> 
> I think that better overall talent evaluation and cap management could have helped this inevitable change be for a whole lot brighter future then what they've been able to achieve so far. Management's actions do not inspire much hope in me that they'll choose correctly at the next crossroads.
> 
> STOMP


You are absoltely right Stomp I agree yet much of our problems had to with player behavior IMO which is not a constant. No one could predict Bonzi, Sheed, Patterson and Damon would all do multiple stupid/illegal things thus driving down their value as trade assets. I simply think current management is doing their best to dig themselves out of the hole dug by Whitless. 

Granted some of our recent draft picks may turn out to be poor choices in retrospect yet all have potential to help this team. Cap management is definetly a problem and current management can be blamed for giving obscene contracts to Theo and Zach and probably overpaying Darius as well. 

Taking into consideration what they started with and what they have done with it and adding in a few mistakes along the way I would give current management a mediocre rating.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

sa1177 said:


> No one could predict Bonzi, Sheed, Patterson and Damon would all do multiple stupid/illegal things thus driving down their value as trade assets. I simply think current management is doing their best to dig themselves out of the hole dug by Whitless.


So, no one could have predicted it, but it is all Bob Whitsitt's fault?

barfo


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

SA, I respectfully disagree. Bonzi had a history and Patterson sure did. There was no reason to think they would change in Portland. Rasheed was known to be a hothead. His legal troubles were on the whole minor (one marijuana bust is all I remember); it's his oncourt that gave headaches. 
Basically a lot of chances were taken. IMHO it's OK to take some but Whitsitt took too many and many were for players who were low reward/high risk. 
And every draft pick is a guess. Even the ones who were expected to turn out great and do, can you guarantee they will stay with your team (i.e. Shaquille O'Neal)?


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

barfo said:


> So, no one could have predicted it, but it is all Bob Whitsitt's fault?
> 
> barfo


Agreed he cannot be faulted for not forseeing the problem yet he can be faulted for not addressing or dealing with the problem...I never remember Bob telling Sheed and Damon they couldn't drive home from Seattle in their yellow Hummer. 



> The only downer for Randolph was that he wasn't allowed to drive home with friends, a precautionary measure taken by a team that still remembers the names Damon Stoudamire and Rasheed Wallace, and how a yellow Hummer, marijuana and state police don't mix.


Bob had no connection, control or respect from those players. He was disconnected from the team and coaching staff and never made a attempt to establish a connection. Whitsitts control over the organization was pathetic at best. 

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/o...xclude/1138677941136310.xml&coll=7&thispage=2


----------



## BealzeeBob (Jan 6, 2003)

Just to be clear, BealzeeBob and CatchNRelease are the same person, different machines.



STOMP said:


> Then why do it?


I guess that I didn't think that I did that. I could have gone into what a complete *** hole that he was (and why), compared to the talent and effort he brought. Wasn't going to go there but, predictably, you had to throw your usual smart *** comment in there. Perhaps I should just let all you Wallace fans comment, and just keep my thoughts to myself, cause I sure wouldn't want to offend you with reminders of the 'other' side of Wallace. 



> Because as a Blazer and now a Piston he's played where ever his coach needed him to from the 3-5? Sure he's great on the low block, but any player without outside shooters to support them is much less effective down there. Wallace was easily one of Portland's best outside threats, and they had several other players (Zach, Dale, Ruben, Wells) who only did well in the paint.


That you would say that Wallace did what the coach asked makes me laugh. Do you think that Mo asked him to show up for practice after Bonzi was dumped, wearing Bonzi's number? Wallace had no respect for Mo, and did pretty much what he felt like doing, IMO.

Are you making a case that Wallace would have played center/backup center if Mo asked him to? Would you also make the case that the team was better with DD at center than if they had Wallace playing there when Sabas was resting, or injured?

You don't recall Mo saying he wished Wallace would play in the post more? Zach has developed a good outside shot, we're short on good outside shooters....but does Nate want Zach playing on the perimeter? Don't think so. Nor do I think that is what Mo wanted Wallace to do.

I don't watch the Pistons much. What position do they have Wallace playing?



> IMO being listed as a center is mostly about who a player matches up with on D. Besides _"the short time before they dumped him"_ he'd guarded all sorts of low post bangers in the regular season and the playoffs, and thats what he's been doing in Detroit since as well. Shaq, Duncan, Ming, ect... I could site specific games if you like.
> 
> STOMP


OK then, in your lineup, who plays C on offense?

Go Blazers


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

BealzeeBob said:


> I guess that I didn't think that I did that.


sure you did. After claiming you didn't want to rehash the old debates, you took the time to put out several of your disparaging views that you've posted verbatim before... what exactly do you think rehashing is?



> I could have gone into what a complete *** hole that he was (and why), compared to the talent and effort he brought. Wasn't going to go there but, predictably, you had to throw your usual smart *** comment in there. Perhaps I should just let all you Wallace fans comment, and just keep my thoughts to myself, cause I sure wouldn't want to offend you with reminders of the 'other' side of Wallace.


hey, do whatever you want. Just given the amount of time you've spent the time composing vile rants about your distain for Sheed, I found your preamble pretty disingenuous. Remember when you started a new thread slamming him for being accused of assualting a woman? Since you called me out personally as if you really had something I'm sure you do... if only you'd have looked up the history of that incident before you gleefully relayed it years after the fact...

In this fresh thread, where exactly are all the _"Wallace fans"_ praising him prior to you taking yet another rehashed dump on him? theWanker said something positive about him hypothetically being part of a team of good players here, and I joined in the fantasy hoops mode adding Baron to the mix, I barely mentioned Wallace though. Maris points out that he's recently been in two championship series to counter that assertion that he's a loser. On the dark side several of the regulars took their daily crap on Sheed. I swear his memory keeps some posters right as rain... I try to give them enough room to do their business. 

I don't know how you could read this thread and conclude that Wallace fans were spouting off disproportionately though... IMO the counter barely put a word in... I know I avoid speaking my mind on Wallace related topics because I don't want to get bogged down in bleep like this. 



> That you would say that Wallace did what the coach asked makes me laugh. Do you think that Mo asked him to show up for practice after Bonzi was dumped, wearing Bonzi's number? Wallace had no respect for Mo, and did pretty much what he felt like doing, IMO.


I guess thats why Mo publically credits Wallace as such a great player and teammate... do you blackout Bonzi style when they've embraced prior to and after ever game their respective teams have matched up since Sheed was dealt?



> Are you making a case that Wallace would have played center/backup center if Mo asked him to? Would you also make the case that the team was better with DD at center than if they had Wallace playing there when Sabas was resting, or injured?


In the time period you're referencing, Wallace was already playing 35 minutes per game. They had 2 decent PFs and holes at 3 and 5. If only cloning was a little more advanced eh? Despite that limitation, Wallace has spent PT guarding every dominant post player in the league every season for years on end now. While I respect your right to having your opinion (oft repeated that Wallace doesn't like contact and won't guard so and so)... tell me the player and I'll link you the game recap where he did in fact guard him. 



> You don't recall Mo saying he wished Wallace would play in the post more?


No I don't, and I'm sure that you can't find a quote. Trust me doesn't count. 



> Zach has developed a good outside shot, we're short on good outside shooters....but does Nate want Zach playing on the perimeter? Don't think so. Nor do I think that is what Mo wanted Wallace to do.


fair enough, think whatever you want. But consider that Nate's best low post player is Zach (same as Mo's) and the best on-court scenerio is with only one guy down on the block. Too many cooks in the kitchen crowds the necessary spacing. 



> I don't watch the Pistons much. What position do they have Wallace playing?


On offense? It seems to depend on the matchups. Sometimes Flip has him start off halves on the low block and runs play after play for him untill the other team adjusts with a double team... but more often he's setting screens on the high post and floating out to the 3 point line. Ben is not an outside (or even midrange) threat whatsoever.

On D he and Ben switch off taking the main low post player depending on their foul situation. It seems to me that Sheed is better on the man and Ben is better providing the weakside help D. 



> OK then, in your lineup, who plays C on offense?


If you mean who in my listed whimsical fantasy lineup plays low post on offense... depending on matchups I'd either play Zach or Sheed on the block. Zach would be my primary option down low as I think he's the superior offensive rebounder and Sheed is the superior outside threat (dude is shooting 40% from 3's this year). I'd definitely have the ball in Baron's hands a lot though, and him making plays would be the focus of my attack.

btw, Bonzi came back tonight from his groin tear layoff.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap?gid=2006013123&prov=ap

STOMP


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

barfo said:


> So, no one could have predicted it, but it is all Bob Whitsitt's fault?


Personally I blame Bill Clinton.

STOMP


----------



## chula vista blazer (Jul 13, 2005)

Talkhard said:


> Who cares? That other team lost in the first round of the playoffs year after year, and they choked against the Lakers in 2000. I think our team now has more heart and more character.


My God....what a statement!


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Stomp-

I hadn't realized Sheed was shooting so well from three. you're right, though:
http://www.nba.com/playerfile/rasheed_wallace/index.html

that's pretty damned amazing. I mean Dirk Nowitzki-level good. I can't think of any other players over 6-11 who've had a season shooting that well from 3. 

man, can you imagine Sheed nailing threes at that clip on this team (along with the defense, passing, and everything else)? we certainly wouldn't be the third worst three point shooting team in the league. 

Detroit is just an insanely good team this year. there's a reason they are winning by 9 points a game on average.


----------



## el_Diablo (May 15, 2003)

> I never remember Bob telling Sheed and Damon they couldn't drive home from Seattle in their yellow Hummer.


they had a designated driver by the way... so, who cares.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

el_Diablo said:


> they had a designated driver by the way... so, who cares.


yeah, thats about how I feel about that. Intoxicated drivers suck, impaired passengers don't bother me one iota.

I think that got most of it's run because it's such a comical image... NBA players getting high in the back of a speeding bright yellow Hummer with custom _Scl Bus_ plates. Not exactly stealth.

STOMP


----------



## BealzeeBob (Jan 6, 2003)

STOMP said:


> sure you did. After claiming you didn't want to rehash the old debates, you took the time to put out several of your disparaging views that you've posted verbatim before... what exactly do you think rehashing is?


:laugh: You are truly a piece of work, STOMP.

The 'disparaging views that I've posted verbatim before'? When was that? Would you please provide a link to those verbatim posts? If you don't, your bleep doesn't count, right?

For the record, my 'dark, vile, disparaging, disdainful comments' were that I didn't see why you and Wanker would list Wallace at center, as he didn't like the contact of playing center, and that if he had played center here, we MIGHT have had a better shot at a title. Wow, pretty dark, vile, disdainful and disparaging, alright. 

Threatening a ref after a game. Has anyone else in the NBA EVER done that? Now THAT’s vile and disparaging to the ref, don’t ya think?
Called the NBA out for holding the black man down. I think there lots of NBA fans that thought that comment was vile, and disparaging of a league that made him a multimillionaire.
Set the record for technicals for, what?, 4 years and counting? Not to mention that he set the bar so high, at 41 T's, I doubt anyone will ever best him. I know you don’t think that behavior is vile, but I sure would make a case for showing disdain for the many refs he whined a cried to.
Took Bonzi's side against Mo. Both vile and disparaging toward Mo, IMO.
Getting throw out of games, for being a loudmouth prima dona. Maybe not vile, but certainly disdainful of the need to win the game.
Throwing a towel in his teammate's face. Both V&D.
Don't really care about his ride back to Portland after the Seattle game, but as long as I'm giving examples...
THAT, exactly, is what I consider re-hashing, since you asked.



> hey, do whatever you want. Just given the amount of time you've spent the time composing vile rants about your distain for Sheed, I found your preamble pretty disingenuous.


I think your adoration of Wallace is affecting your judgment, STOMP. I merely disagreed with you about listing Wallace at C, and noted that I think the Blazers would have been better had he played more at the C. I didn’t insult you, or Wallace. As for calling my post a rant, that brings the ‘ol “pot to kettle’ thing to mind. Only your post really IS a rant.



> Remember when you started a new thread slamming him for being accused of assualting a woman? Since you called me out personally as if you really had something I'm sure you do... if only you'd have looked up the history of that incident before you gleefully relayed it years after the fact...


Could you provide a link to me slamming him for assaulting a woman, because I don't recall ever doing that. But Wallace was here for a long time, and if it was reported that he did that, I would probably have commented on it. I’d hope you’d supply a link though, or like you say, it doesn’t count.



> In this fresh thread, where exactly are all the _"Wallace fans"_ praising him prior to you taking yet another rehashed dump on him?


Well, I guess I didn't realize that questioning having him listed at the C spot was the same as taking a dump on him.
Wanker said they'd be fun to watch with Wallace, and a playoff team.
K_M_D says that, if it made them a 50 win team, he'd want both Wallace and Wells back.
Maris61 says, just ask to see his jewelry.
ebot said that if we had kept those two maybe we'd still be a playoff team.
You said 50 wins, easy. Them you went on to show your disdain for the current team by making vile, disparaging sarcastic remarks about them.
Hope that helps.

**And** quoting those posters is in no way meant to be disrespectful of those opinions. I’m just answering the question. We ALL have a right to our respective opinions. :cheers: 

I find it about as likely that Mo wanted him to do the items rehashed above about as much as he wanted him on the perimeter.



> theWanker said something positive about him hypothetically being part of a team of good players here, and I joined in the fantasy hoops mode adding Baron to the mix, I barely mentioned Wallace though. Maris points out that he's recently been in two championship series to counter that assertion that he's a loser. On the dark side several of the regulars took their daily crap on Sheed. I swear his memory keeps some posters right as rain... I try to give them enough room to do their business.


I never said Wallace was a loser. I guess everyone that disagrees with you are just haters that are just waiting to crap on your boy, with dark, vile, disparaging comments. Whatever you say, STOMP.



> I know I avoid speaking my mind on Wallace related topics because I don't want to get bogged down in bleep like this.


Yet you never miss the opportunity to not only defend Wallace, but to insult anyone that doesn't share your love for him. Go figure.



> I guess thats why Mo publically credits Wallace as such a great player and teammate... do you blackout Bonzi style when they've embraced prior to and after ever game their respective teams have matched up since Sheed was dealt?


I think it's testament to Mo’s character that he’s a big enough man to forgive Wallace for being such an ******* all those years. :clap: 



> In the time period you're referencing, Wallace was already playing 35 minutes per game. They had 2 decent PFs and holes at 3 and 5. If only cloning was a little more advanced eh? Despite that limitation, Wallace has spent PT guarding every dominant post player in the league every season for years on end now. While I respect your right to having your opinion (oft repeated that Wallace doesn't like contact and won't guard so and so)... tell me the player and I'll link you the game recap where he did in fact guard him.


OK, once again, a link to where I've said that Wallace wouldn't guard so and so. I've never questioned his talent, or his defense. No link, no count, right?



> N I don't, and I'm sure that you can't find a quote. Trust me doesn't count.


I heard it on a radio sound bite, and I don't have a link. If it doesn't count with you, trust me, I'm fine with that.



> fair enough, think whatever you want. But consider that Nate's best low post player is Zach (same as Mo's) and the best on-court scenerio is with only one guy down on the block. Too many cooks in the kitchen crowds the necessary spacing.
> 
> If you mean who in my listed whimsical fantasy lineup plays low post on offense... depending on matchups I'd either play Zach or Sheed on the block. Zach would be my primary option down low as I think he's the superior offensive rebounder and Sheed is the superior outside threat (dude is shooting 40% from 3's this year). I'd definitely have the ball in Baron's hands a lot though, and him making plays would be the focus of my attack.
> 
> btw, Bonzi came back tonight from his groin tear layoff.


I'll refrain from anything dark, vile or disdainful toward your baiting and just say *yawn*

STOMP[/QUOTE]

Do you consider Wallace a finesse player or a power player, STOMP? I would definitely put him in the finesse player category. IMHO, finesse players get the job done by skill and athletic ability instead of brute force and intimidation (see Karl "Elbows" Malone.) Power players embrace the contact of playing on the low block. Finesse players tend to play farther out, seemingly because they don't like the contact of playing down low. Centers, for the most part, spend most of the time on the block, as they need to defend the lane and rebound. My experience in watching Wallace was that he prefers not to do that. His rebounding numbers have always reflected that he doesn't like mixing it up. For a 6'-11" guys with the wingspan of a 747, you'd think he'd get more rebounds than that by accident, if he were in the post instead of on the perimeter. When he was at SF, with Sabas and Grant on the floor, it made sense for him to play on the perimeter. That's my view of Wallace, as dark, disparaging and vile as that may be. 

Seems to me that the Blazers would have been a much better team, had Wallace played center when Sabonis rested, or was injured. Instead, they had B. Grant, much undersized, playing C, and later DD, much less skilled playing C.

You may not agree, but it doesn't seem like much of a reason to go off the deep end.

Go Blazers


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Ouch......Pwned!


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

BealzeeBob said:


> The 'disparaging views that I've posted verbatim before'? When was that? Would you please provide a link to those verbatim posts? If you don't, your bleep doesn't count, right?


first of all, sorry it's taken me a few moments to get back to this most important of discussions...

*rehash* http://www.answers.com/rehash&r=67 
1. To bring forth again in another form without significant alteration: rehashing old ideas.
2. To discuss again.

heres a few links where you said the same exact stuff... browsing through your history shows that I'm barely scratching the surface of this broken record

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=76405&page=1&pp=15

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?p=1195309#post1195309

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?p=616725#post616725

Pretty transparent to read you claim that you don't want to open the same old debates when you then launch right into your same old bleep. If you don't want to do something, don't... no one is forcing you to do a thing big boy.



> For the record, my 'dark, vile, disparaging, disdainful comments' were that I didn't see why you and Wanker would list Wallace at center, as he didn't like the contact of playing center, and that if he had played center here, we MIGHT have had a better shot at a title. Wow, pretty dark, vile, disdainful and disparaging, all right.


I think we're getting hung up on semantics on what exactly a center is. You seem to feel that the primary thing that defines a center is low post play on offense. I think of it more as the biggest guy on a team who guards the other team's best low post player on D. Is Brad Miller not a center either in your world? How come Tim Duncan is listed as a 4 if he plays down low like a _center_? 

I don't care about the positional labels as much as having the various parts fit well together. Teams with only perimeter or post threats, are not as effective as teams with a balanced attack (IMO), and if you have more then one guy in the post at a time thats too many. That Wallace can play inside or out depending on the strengths of his teammates is a big plus in my book. You're contention that he plays on the outside because he doesn't like contact and that he floats outside against the will of his coaches, while a valid opinion to hold, is not supported by either quotes from those coaches or by his history as a Blazer and now a Piston. When he's had teammates who can shoot from the outside, he's spent PT down on the block. When he's not had that, he spreads the court and if one is to believe his coaches, it’s been what they wanted. I think he’s probably more effective on the outside…. smallish hands (he can barely palm the ball) and a poor relationship with the refs do not help him down on the block, and a ball sharing 6’10 player with a nearly unblockable upper 30 percentile 3pt shot is a tremendous weapon. 

Winning is what it's about though right??? Well it’s a huge percentage of why I tune in. Things have been going very well for Detroit (healthy club...etc), but over the last 3 regular seasons since the Pistons attained Sheed, they've gone 112-44. Lot's of injuries and poor guard play (IMO) has seen Portland go 59-99. For me it's not that some player is gone, it's that the club replaced him with such drek.



> Threatening a ref after a game. Has anyone else in the NBA EVER done that? Now THAT’s vile and disparaging to the ref, don’t ya think?
> Called the NBA out for holding the black man down. I think there lots of NBA fans that thought that comment was vile, and disparaging of a league that made him a multimillionaire.
> Set the record for technicals for, what?, 4 years and counting? Not to mention that he set the bar so high, at 41 T's, I doubt anyone will ever best him. I know you don’t think that behavior is vile, but I sure would make a case for showing disdain for the many refs he whined a cried to.
> Took Bonzi's side against Mo. Both vile and disparaging toward Mo, IMO.
> ...


I would consider that a much more complete rehashing of a large amount of your posting history... something that you usually seem to get around to doing regardless of whether anyone asks. But that doesn't change the fact that you were previously rehashing some of those same contentions earlier in this thread.



> I think your adoration of Wallace is affecting your judgment, STOMP. I merely disagreed with you about listing Wallace at C, and noted that I think the Blazers would have been better had he played more at the C. I didn’t insult you, or Wallace. As for calling my post a rant, that brings the ‘ol “pot to kettle’ thing to mind. Only your post really IS a rant.


Wowza! It seems well past time to secretly switch your espresso to Sanka. 

Much like how you don't believe Wallace's coaches when they profess to like Sheed as a player and a guy, apparently you feel that I've been lying (or more likely you've forgotten) when I've previously stated in response to your stuff that Wallace has never been one of my favorite players. 

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=85049&page=3&pp=15 

I root for the team way over the individual, and I recognize that every Blazer will someday be an ex-Blazer. I get the impression that my rooting for Wallace doesn’t hold a candle to the amount you root against him… heck, he’s only my 3rd favorite Piston. I valued him because I think he's an excellent player who provided interior D that I feel translates into winning hoops. As a longtime fan of the TrailBlazers, I had a huge problem with the load of nothing that they acquired for him... management couldn't have handled that much worse. Piss poor planning on their part.

and where in the world did you pull impression that I felt insulted by you? Confused is more like it.



> Could you provide a link to me slamming him for assaulting a woman, because I don't recall ever doing that. But Wallace was here for a long time, and if it was reported that he did that, I would probably have commented on it. I’d hope you’d supply a link though, or like you say, it doesn’t count.


http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?p=1300075#post1300075

Well I was wrong… sort of. You didn’t start the link, but you did personally call me out early on in it completely out of the blue thinking you might finally be onto something… too bad you choose to do so on such pathetic grounds, eh Bob?



> Well, I guess I didn't realize that questioning having him listed at the C spot was the same as taking a dump on him.


Come on Bob, thats not accurate. Your original statement infers that he plays on the perimeter against what his coach wants and as opposed to what the team needed because he doesn't want to bang. That boils down to you calling him a selfish wimp. To make the statement you did while claiming to not want to re-hash the old debate... BS.



> Wanker said they'd be fun to watch with Wallace, and a playoff team.
> K_M_D says that, if it made them a 50 win team, he'd want both Wallace and Wells back.
> Maris61 says, just ask to see his jewelry.
> ebot said that if we had kept those two maybe we'd still be a playoff team.
> You said 50 wins, easy.


Good grief Charlie Brown, I said if Portland added Baron Davis to that mix, then 50 wins easy. Why is this so hard for you?



> Them you went on to show your disdain for the current team by making vile, disparaging sarcastic remarks about them.


Disparaging and sarcastic? You bet. The team sucks, and I think they’ll likely take another giant step backwards this offseason… unfortunately it’s my guess that they’ll probably lose Joel to free agency. Because of poor management I think mediocrity is probably a ways away. Is there really something wrong with a fan calling their favorite club is a bad team when they are a bad team? But vile? Is this an example of no sense of humor or another display of your personal battle with the meanings of words?



> I find it about as likely that Mo wanted him to do the items rehashed above about as much as he wanted him on the perimeter.


fine by me, feel whatever you want to.



> I never said Wallace was a loser. I guess everyone that disagrees with you are just haters that are just waiting to crap on your boy, with dark, vile, disparaging comments. Whatever you say, STOMP.


Wrong! http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?p=282321#post282321



> Yet you never miss the opportunity to not only defend Wallace, but to insult anyone that doesn't share your love for him. Go figure.


Wrong again! http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=238017



> I think it's testament to Mo’s character that he’s a big enough man to forgive Wallace for being such an ******* all those years.


I’ve no problem with that… we’re each free to form our opinions on whatever we see fit. 



> OK, once again, a link to where I've said that Wallace wouldn't guard so and so. I've never questioned his talent, or his defense. No link, no count, right?


Again??? I was trying to address the _avoids contact_ stuff you keep throwing out. When guarding the premiere post players in the league (pretty well IMO) he encounters all sorts of contact. See above (and prior threads) to see more on my views of what makes a team effective in its offensive attack. 



> I heard it on a radio sound bite, and I don't have a link. If it doesn't count with you, trust me, I'm fine with that.


It doesn't, but thats cool… and really it's nothing personal. In general I don’t add my untraceable first hand experiences or what I heard on the radio to heated discussions here because we really don’t know each other enough to take each others words without at least withholding some doubts... well maybe you and Bob do. Btw, I thought it was pretty funny when in prior threads you'd list Bob and CatchNRelease (along with TH, Terrible and Jackie Jackel) as like minded people in arguements you'd have with others.



> I'll refrain from anything dark, vile or disdainful toward your baiting and just say *yawn*


baiting  jeez anything but…no wonder you’ve attracted a new admirer. Just wondering, did he send you a PM praising you giving you rep points for blasting me? I used to receive that sort of stuff from him when I’d take on posters who he’d feud with. 



> Do you consider Wallace a finesse player or a power player, STOMP? I would definitely put him in the finesse player category. IMHO, finesse players get the job done by skill and athletic ability instead of brute force and intimidation (see Karl "Elbows" Malone.) Power players embrace the contact of playing on the low block. Finesse players tend to play farther out, seemingly because they don't like the contact of playing down low. Centers, for the most part, spend most of the time on the block, as they need to defend the lane and rebound. My experience in watching Wallace was that he prefers not to do that. His rebounding numbers have always reflected that he doesn't like mixing it up. For a 6'-11" guys with the wingspan of a 747, you'd think he'd get more rebounds than that by accident, if he were in the post instead of on the perimeter. When he was at SF, with Sabas and Grant on the floor, it made sense for him to play on the perimeter.
> 
> Seems to me that the Blazers would have been a much better team, had Wallace played center when Sabonis rested, or was injured. Instead, they had B. Grant, much undersized, playing C, and later DD, much less skilled playing C.


Neither Dale or Brian Grant had any sort of game outside of the paint on offense, and what they had there wasn’t that great either IMO. For the 10,000th time, not everyone can play in the post at once, and no team would have respected them one iota as an outside threat supporting Sheed in the post. He would have been doubled every time he touched it. Most of the rest of the team in that era were poor outside shooters who wouldn't have capitalized from open looks… would you really have wanted to see more heaves from Dale, Grant, Bonzi, PIP, and Rube from the outside? The last time the Blazers featured Wallace regularly down on the block was when he had a healthy Sabas at the top of the key and Steve Smith on the perimeter.

Finesse or power? Both, but I think he’s better at the finesse part and that keeps him out of foul trouble for the end of the game. I agree with the way he's been used

Btw… though I view most top athletes as spoiled babies who I’d rather never meet, Karl Malone stands apart. Being alternately a vicious cheap shot artist and a flopper extraordinaire is bad enough, but did you know he’s a scumbag deadbeat dad to boot? While a soph at Louisiana Tech he got a 13 year old pregnant and avoided supporting the child for years until the courts caught up with him. He refused to see his son, and only supported him at the most minimal financial level based on what he was making at the time the baby was concieved. Same goes for his longterm high school sweetheart who he knocked up with twin boys and dumped when she told him. What a piece of work. Sort of odd that you would repeatedly hold up that guy again and again in your Wallace musings.



> You may not agree, but it doesn't seem like much of a reason to go off the deep end.


I don't think I've ever seen a blacker kettle then you Bob.

STOMP


----------



## CatchNRelease (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> first of all, sorry it's taken me a few moments to get back to this most important of discussions...
> 
> *rehash* http://www.answers.com/rehash&r=67
> 1. To bring forth again in another form without significant alteration: rehashing old ideas.
> ...


If you’re going to get all dictionary on me, you win. Let’s talk about the word verbatim, from your post:

*Verbatim* [url}www.answers.com/topic/verbatim?method=8[/url}
1.	Using exactly the same words; corresponding word for word: a verbatim report of the conversation.
2.	In exactly the same words; word for word: repeated their dialogue verbatim.

Well, Mr. Webster, you haven’t provided a link to anything verbatim, so by your rules your bleep don’t count, right? And, you’re going back 2-3-years? Yeah, I’ve been riding that horse to death.

You should listen carefully to that ‘broken record’, it keeps going, “Catch-STOMP… Catch-STOMP… Catch-STOMP… Catch-STOMP, eh, Potty?



> I think we're getting hung up on semantics on what exactly a center is. You seem to feel that the primary thing that defines a center is low post play on offense.


Thanks for defining what you think I think a center is for me. Could you provide a link to where I said that? You seem to like making arguments based on what I ‘seem to feel’, or ‘infer’. The center on defense should be guarding the lane, rebounding, boxing out, blocking shots and making outlet passes. And, yeah, much of the time he should be guarding the other team's best big.



> I think of it more as the biggest guy on a team who guards the other team's best low post player on D.


Wallace was, by far the best player we had to back up the C, if he would do it, because of his height and length. If you’re making a case that Wallace always guarded the other team’s best big, why do I have images of BG being manhandled by Shaq, and bloodied by Malone. Same for DD, getting mauled by Shaq. I know that there were times Wallace guarded these types, but not like you’re making it sound.

Do you remember Brian Grant defending Shaq, when backing up Sabas? Wouldn’t that mean BG was the C – being that he was defending the best big? Who was LA’s badass 4 that warranted Wallaces attention? Didn’t they trade for DD to have some kind of answer to Shaq at C? If Wallace played the best big on D, why didn’t he play the center of our biggest rival, when Sabas was down? 



> Is Brad Miller not a center either in your world?


Um, yes. What is he in your world?



> How come Tim Duncan is listed as a 4 if he plays down low like a _center_?


Where did I say that a PF doesn’t, or shouldn't play on the low block? I thought I’ve been pretty clear through all these years of vile, dark, disparaging rants that I think Wallace should have played in the post, be it as a 4 or as a C (if he had played there). 
Wallace not playing the C addresses why I don’t think Wallace played wherever the coach wanted him to play. How about when BG would go against Malone? Wasn’t he the best big for the Jazz? Who required Wallace’s attention more than Mr. Physical?



> I don't care about the positional labels as much as having the various parts fit well together. Teams with only perimeter or post threats, are not as effective as teams with a balanced attack (IMO), and if you have more then one guy in the post at a time thats too many.


Shaq and Karl. Both post players, wouldn’t you agree? Shaq got his, and Karl had damn good numbers playing third fiddle. Shaq and Brian Grant. Timmy and Muhammed. Timmy and David. ‘Tag and Karl. Parish and McHale. Jabar and Rambis. Theo and Zach. Joel and Zach. Bill and Luke. All lineups with two post players in the lineup, and I'm pretty sure there are a few more examples. So, are you saying that during Wallace’s years here, they were only a one dimensional post threat unless Wallace was floating around the arc?



> That Wallace can play inside or out depending on the strengths of his teammates is a big plus in my book.


I’ve never said he *can’t[b/] play inside. I said he didn’t like to. I agree that would have been a big[b/] plus, if he had played inside more.




You're contention that he plays on the outside because he doesn't like contact and that he floats outside against the will of his coaches, while a valid opinion to hold, is not supported by either quotes from those coaches or by his history as a Blazer and now a Piston.

Click to expand...

And yet, you don’t provide a link to a single quote by a Blazers coach saying that they asked Wallace to play outside more. Doesn’t that mean that your bleep doesn’t count, if I’m to ‘trust you’? Beyond that, you seem to take what these guys say as gospel. Did you believe Whitsitt when he used to say he wasn’t considering any trades, or when any GM says who they will target in advance of the draft? 
Wallace was the star, Mo was the coach. If marginal coach diss’s star player, who get’s fired? Could there be a vested interest on Mo’s part to keep Wallace happy? If Mo complained to the press that Wallace wouldn’t play in the post more, would that have made his star happy?




When he's had teammates who can shoot from the outside, he's spent PT down on the block. When he's not had that, he spreads the court and if one is to believe his coaches, it’s been what they wanted.

Click to expand...

It’s a little hard to argue the merits of your perfect lineup, as it’s whatever fits well together. In PDX, you say he played on the outside because he didn’t have outside shooting (and there were years that they did have decent outside shooting.) He plays on the outside, a lot, at Detroit, yet they have good outside shooting to support his inside game. Could it be possible that he doesn’t like to play inside, and his coaches find ways to accommodate that?




I think he’s probably more effective on the outside…. smallish hands (he can barely palm the ball) and a poor relationship with the refs do not help him down on the block, and a ball sharing 6’10 player with a nearly unblockable upper 30 percentile 3pt shot is a tremendous weapon.

Click to expand...

If his poor relationship with the refs keeps him from playing in the post, who’s responsible for that? He’s got an upper 30 percentile 3pt shot this year, but is a lower 30 percentile for his career. His over 50 percentile fg% in the years before he fell in love with the perimeter game was a pretty tremendous and unblockable weapon too, IMO.




Winning is what it's about though right??? Well it’s a huge percentage of why I tune in. Things have been going very well for Detroit (healthy club...etc), but over the last 3 regular seasons since the Pistons attained Sheed, they've gone 112-44. Lot's of injuries and poor guard play (IMO) has seen Portland go 59-99. For me it's not that some player is gone, it's that the club replaced him with such drek.

Click to expand...

Well, if it’s all about winning, you’re not going to be real happy with this team for a while. You don’t like how the team’s managed, you think of Theo, and Reef last year, as ‘drek’. You think of Juan and Steve as Wizard scrubs. You don’t seem to like watching the young guys develop. You don’t live here. And it’s all about winning for you. Are you sure you’re at the right forum?

GoBlazers*


----------



## CatchNRelease (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> I would consider that a much more complete rehashing of a large amount of your posting history... something that you usually seem to get around to doing regardless of whether anyone asks. But that doesn't change the fact that you were previously rehashing some of those same contentions earlier in this thread.


:laugh: Good one STOMP! Like you wait for someone to ask your opinion??? You’re get’n blacker by the minute, big boy.



> Wowza! It seems well past time to secretly switch your espresso to Sanka.


*yawn* You’re off your game. You’re usually either funnier or meaner. That’s just kinda dumb. 


> Much like how you don't believe Wallace's coaches when they profess to like Sheed as a player and a guy,


Yet Brown quit the Pistons after a season and a half of Wallace being there, and right after he won a title. I don’t know if he left because of Wallace, but he sure as hell didn’t stay there because of him, either.


> apparently you feel that I've been lying (or more likely you've forgotten) when I've previously stated in response to your stuff that Wallace has never been one of my favorite players.


I don’t think I said he’s your favorite player. But, though he’s not your fav, you constantly defend anything said against Wallace for about, what? The last 3-4 years? 



> As a longtime fan of the TrailBlazers, I had a huge problem with the load of nothing that they acquired for him... management couldn't have handled that much worse. Piss poor planning on their part.


I don’t consider Theo and SAR a load of nothing, or drek. It’s what they’ve done since that is piss poor management, IMO. Theo’s contract was foolish on Nash’s part, and letting SAR walk for nothing was nearly as bad.



> http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?p=1300075#post1300075
> Well I was wrong… sort of. You didn’t start the link, but you did personally call me out early on in it completely out of the blue thinking you might finally be onto something… too bad you choose to do so on such pathetic grounds, eh Bob?


Looks kinda like what I said. There was an article linked to the O and I commented on it. 

Here’s a link, not from that vile Oregonian, on the assault:
http://www.kstatecollegian.com/issues/v100/sp/n148/spt-ap-wallace.html

Here’s another one… http://wizznutzz.com/rapsheet.html
‘Prosecution on that charge was deferred for a year after Wallace apologized in court and agreed to perform 50 hours of community service and to seek counseling for his anger.’

As for pathetic, yep, but not in the way you mean. Wallace *apologized and agreed to perform 50 hours of CS and seek anger counseling*. In the link you provide, you say he was acquitted. What, in his agreeing to CS and counseling says he was acquitted? *That’s* what’s pathetic, big boy….and WRONG. Would you either provide a link showing he was acquitted of the first assault, or admit that you’re just making things up as you go along?



> Come on Bob, thats not accurate. Your original statement infers that he plays on the perimeter against what his coach wants and as opposed to what the team needed because he doesn't want to bang. That boils down to you calling him a selfish wimp. To make the statement you did while claiming to not want to re-hash the old debate... BS.


And here I thought it boiled down to me calling him a finesse player. I didn’t then, and don’t now think Mo wanted him to play on the perimeter. I don’t recall Mo ever saying that. Maybe you could link me up, or else say you made it up and it doesn’t count?

Do you think that Wallace likes to bang? Seriously? Do you consider him more of a power player than a finesse player?



> Good grief Charlie Brown, I said if Portland added Baron Davis to that mix, then 50 wins easy. Why is this so hard for you?


I listed several examples in answer to your question, you dispute *one* of them, then start your smartass routine again. :whatever: I guess the other posts I noted don’t count, because they were pimp’n Wallace, but you wanted Wallace AND Davis. It's really not that hard, STOMP.



> Disparaging and sarcastic? You bet. The team sucks, and I think they’ll likely take another giant step backwards this offseason… unfortunately it’s my guess that they’ll probably lose Joel to free agency. Because of poor management I think mediocrity is probably a ways away. Is there really something wrong with a fan calling their favorite club is a bad team when they are a bad team? But vile? Is this an example of no sense of humor or another display of your personal battle with the meanings of words?


:laugh: No sense of humor about you referring to my posts as dark, vile, disparaging? Imagine that! Maybe I can help you, as you do seem confused:
http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=30&f=29



> Wrong! http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?p=282321#post282321


Oh, yeah, I must’ve blacked out on that time three years ago. I’ve sure been riding that horse hard, too.



> It doesn't, but thats cool… and really it's nothing personal. In general I don’t add my untraceable first hand experiences or what I heard on the radio to heated discussions here because we really don’t know each other enough to take each others words without at least withholding some doubts... well maybe you and Bob do.


In general, I try not to make up stuff such as Wallace being acquitted to make my points. I’m still waiting for those links to Mo saying he wanted Wallace playing on the perimeter, or should I just take your indisputable word for it, being’s how we know each other so well and all.



> Btw, I thought it was pretty funny when in prior threads you'd list Bob and CatchNRelease (along with TH, Terrible and Jackie Jackel) as like minded people in arguements you'd have with others.


Provide links or admit you’re making things up. (You said threads, so links to each, please.) In a sarcastic response to you slamming me for being one of the first on the ‘dump Wallace’ bandwagon, I said thanks to Talkhard, JackieJackel and Terrible for showing that I'm not the only one here that feels he's simply not worth it….among a number of other sarcastic remarks. That says we’re like minded on ONE issue, or did I somehow infer something else? If there are other instances of me saying something like that, let’s see it.



> baiting  jeez anything but…no wonder you’ve attracted a new admirer. Just wondering, did he send you a PM praising you giving you rep points for blasting me? I used to receive that sort of stuff from him when I’d take on posters who he’d feud with.


No, he didn’t, but now I’m all jealous and ****. 

For the record, I asked a question, you made a smart *** comment toward me, I responded with a smart *** comment, then YOU BLASTED ME, *THEN* I blasted you. 



> Neither Dale or Brian Grant had any sort of game outside of the paint on offense, and what they had there wasn’t that great either IMO. For the 10,000th time, not everyone can play in the post at once, and no team would have respected them one iota as an outside threat supporting Sheed in the post. He would have been doubled every time he touched it. Most of the rest of the team in that era were poor outside shooters who wouldn't have capitalized from open looks… would you really have wanted to see more heaves from Dale, Grant, Bonzi, PIP, and Rube from the outside? The last time the Blazers featured Wallace regularly down on the block was when he had a healthy Sabas at the top of the key and Steve Smith on the perimeter.


Could you provide 10,000 links, or does this not count because you’re making it up?

Who ever said everyone has to play in the post at once? Five would be really crowded. But you’re contention that two guys playing mostly in the low post area, can’t complement each other is bunk. 

As I noted in my previous post:
Shaq and Karl. Both post players, wouldn’t you agree? Shaq got his, and Karl had damn good numbers playing third fiddle. To a lesser degree Shaq and Brian Grant. Timmy and Muhammed. Timmy and David. ‘Tag and Karl. Parish and McHale. Theo and Zach. Joel and Zach. Bill and Luke. There’s lots more, but that’s off the top of my head, for the 10,000th time.



> Btw… though I view most top athletes as spoiled babies who I’d rather never meet, Karl Malone stands apart. Being alternately a vicious cheap shot artist and a flopper extraordinaire is bad enough, but did you know he’s a scumbag deadbeat dad to boot? While a soph at Louisiana Tech he got a 13 year old pregnant and avoided supporting the child for years until the courts caught up with him. He refused to see his son, and only supported him at the most minimal financial level based on what he was making at the time the baby was concieved. Same goes for his longterm high school sweetheart who he knocked up with twin boys and dumped when she told him. What a piece of work. Sort of odd that you would repeatedly hold up that guy again and again in your Wallace musings.


So Malone’s as big an *** hole as Wallace. What’s your point? I hold up ‘that guy’ as a classic example of a POWER PLAYER, as opposed to a finesse player. Do you not agree that Karl was a MUCH more physical player than Wallace. Where did I make ANY reference to Malone being a good character guy?
Personally, I'd love to meet Joel, Theo, Jerod, Sabatian, Travis anb Martel, even if you think they are a bunch of spoiled babies.




> I don't think I've ever seen a blacker kettle then you Bob.


I haven’t either, I’m usually before the blacker kettle. (You might want to check the mirror, STOMP.)


Go Blazers


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

That is one sloppily formatted post. Bolds and unclosed tags all over the place.

Ed O.


----------



## CatchNRelease (Jan 2, 2003)

Ed O said:


> That is one sloppily formatted post. Bolds and unclosed tags all over the place.
> 
> Ed O.


Now THAT, I can't argue with.

Go Blazers


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

CatchNRelease said:


> If you’re going to get all dictionary on me, you win. Let’s talk about the word verbatim, from your post:
> 
> *Verbatim* [url}www.answers.com/topic/verbatim?method=8[/url}
> 1.	Using exactly the same words; corresponding word for word: a verbatim report of the conversation.
> ...


first you cry a river that you aren't rehashing your past posts, then when I demonstrate that thats exactly what you're doing you change the subject and go on the attack. Nice... that pretty much encapsulates my experience in our debates



> Thanks for defining what you think I think a center is for me. Could you provide a link to where I said that?


I've done enough of your homework.



> You seem to like making arguments based on what I ‘seem to feel’, or ‘infer’.


only because I'm walking on eggshells trying to avoid having you blow another gasket and have your anger distort the issues I've been trying to discuss.



> The center on defense should be guarding the lane, rebounding, boxing out, blocking shots and making outlet passes. And, yeah, much of the time he should be guarding the other team's best big. Wallace was, by far the best player we had to back up the C, if he would do it, because of his height and length.


agreed 



> If you’re making a case that Wallace always guarded the other team’s best big, why do I have images of BG being manhandled by Shaq, and bloodied by Malone. Same for DD, getting mauled by Shaq. I know that there were times Wallace guarded these types, but not like you’re making it sound.


Thats not what I said at all... did it _seem_ that way to you? Grant and Dale were not as good as Wallace at guarding anyone (IMO), but they also were not nearly as important to Portland's offensive attack as him. Are you really under the impression that Sheed or any player calls the shots on who they guard? Guarding the oppositions featured offensive player is a sure way for a defender to gather fouls. Conserving their star so as they can have him in with the game on the line is a commonly used tactic by coaches througout the league... thats why Shaq and Karl usually didn't guard Wallace until the 4th quarter either. 



> Do you remember Brian Grant defending Shaq, when backing up Sabas? Wouldn’t that mean BG was the C – being that he was defending the best big? Who was LA’s badass 4 that warranted Wallaces attention?


AC Green was their weakass 4. Wallace consistently played well off of him and doubled down on Shaq every time they put it into the post. Dunlevy's stategy conserved Sheed's fouls and effectively slowed O'Neal down. Too bad PIP dislocated those fingers in game 6 and had to play game 7 one handed eh?



> Didn’t they trade for DD to have some kind of answer to Shaq at C? If Wallace played the best big on D, why didn’t he play the center of our biggest rival, when Sabas was down?


see above 



> Um, yes. What is he (Brad Miller) in your world?


He's a high post center and rarely on the low block... which is why I think that he and SAR are a good match at the 4 and 5. I thought it was your contention that thats where centers played... sorry.



> Where did I say that a PF doesn’t, or shouldn't play on the low block? I thought I’ve been pretty clear through all these years of vile, dark, disparaging rants that I think Wallace should have played in the post, be it as a 4 or as a C (if he had played there).
> Wallace not playing the C addresses why I don’t think Wallace played wherever the coach wanted him to play. How about when BG would go against Malone? Wasn’t he the best big for the Jazz? Who required Wallace’s attention more than Mr. Physical?


Why didn't Malone guard Wallace until the 4th? When the game was on the line (in the 4th), Sheed guarded Karl and usually Portland emerged with the W. Grant usually took the cheapshots from your favorite deadbeat dad/flopper until then. 



> Shaq and Karl. Both post players, wouldn’t you agree?


Yup, though Karl opperated both from the low block and the high post. Especially as he got older, he relied more and more on his 15 foot jumper... and flopping. When he went to the Lakers Karl played almost exclusively at the high post.



> Shaq got his, and Karl had damn good numbers playing third fiddle. Shaq and Brian Grant. Timmy and Muhammed. Timmy and David. ‘Tag and Karl. Parish and McHale. Jabar and Rambis. Theo and Zach. Joel and Zach. Bill and Luke. All lineups with two post players in the lineup, and I'm pretty sure there are a few more examples. So, are you saying that during Wallace’s years here, they were only a one dimensional post threat unless Wallace was floating around the arc?


none of those listed feature both on the low post at the same time... I don't know what else to tell you. I'd have the same reaction if you'd claim the sky was green.

Joel and Theo are a prime example of poor chemistry because neither can operate outside the low block.. actually Theo can't operate effectively anywhere in an offensive set IMO. Bill and Luke are on the opposite end of the chemisty perspective. Luke was always on the low post, Bill with his great passing always on the high. Great combo. It's also great when guys can switch up to take advantage when they've a mismatch. Tim and David had some of that, though for the most part Tim was on the low block and David on the high. I'd have loved to have seen the Wallace Zach combo though, especially since Zach seems to have developed a better outside game. Their versatility would have been amazing IMO. The benefits of having a high post and a low post player is basketball 101.

btw, you listing Tag and Karl... :laugh:



> I’ve never said he *can’t[b/] play inside. I said he didn’t like to. I agree that would have been a big[b/] plus, if he had played inside more.*


*
agreed with who? Within this thead I stated..."I think he’s better at the finesse part and that keeps him out of foul trouble for the end of the game. I agree with the way he's been used"




And yet, you don’t provide a link to a single quote by a Blazers coach saying that they asked Wallace to play outside more. Doesn’t that mean that your bleep doesn’t count, if I’m to ‘trust you’?

Click to expand...

I've done enough research for you, put up or...




Beyond that, you seem to take what these guys say as gospel. Did you believe Whitsitt when he used to say he wasn’t considering any trades, or when any GM says who they will target in advance of the draft? 
Wallace was the star, Mo was the coach. If marginal coach diss’s star player, who get’s fired? Could there be a vested interest on Mo’s part to keep Wallace happy? If Mo complained to the press that Wallace wouldn’t play in the post more, would that have made his star happy?

Click to expand...

snorathon




It’s a little hard to argue the merits of your perfect lineup, as it’s whatever fits well together. In PDX, you say he played on the outside because he didn’t have outside shooting (and there were years that they did have decent outside shooting.) He plays on the outside, a lot, at Detroit, yet they have good outside shooting to support his inside game. Could it be possible that he doesn’t like to play inside, and his coaches find ways to accommodate that?

Click to expand...

you've claimed that you don't watch the Pistons... and you're demonstrating it. 




If his poor relationship with the refs keeps him from playing in the post, who’s responsible for that?

Click to expand...

Seriously whats your problem with comprehension? I've stated previously that I'm not a fan of everything Sheed brought to the floor, and was not a fan of his on court antics. I didn't like Techs or his outbursts, yet I recognise the good qualities he brought as well. 




He’s got an upper 30 percentile 3pt shot this year, but is a lower 30 percentile for his career. His over 50 percentile fg% in the years before he fell in love with the perimeter game was a pretty tremendous and unblockable weapon too, IMO.

Click to expand...

33% from 3 point range equals 50% from 2 point range in point production... need me to do the math for you? Plus a legit big man 3 pt threat pulls a big out to the perimeter to defend that shot. That allows others to exploit an open lane... I know I know thats a tough concept to understand, but in the end it equals a better shot at a W.




Well, if it’s all about winning, you’re not going to be real happy with this team for a while. You don’t like how the team’s managed, you think of Theo, and Reef last year, as ‘drek’. You think of Juan and Steve as Wizard scrubs. You don’t seem to like watching the young guys develop. You don’t live here. And it’s all about winning for you. Are you sure you’re at the right forum?

Click to expand...

If this is really your logic instead of yet another lame attempt to insult me, shouldn't you have left the Blazer forum free of your opinions during Wallace's era? I think the "you don't live here" stuff (yet again) shows off just how desperate you are to fling anything/everything my way. Way to go. My favorite team sucks, I'm not happy about that, it seems perfectly appropriate to me that I vent my thoughts on a message board for said team. There are few parameters here for whats to be discussed only no baiting, swearing, or spamming. Yeah, I'm sure I'm in the right place. You on the other hand... maybe you should go start your own board where some subjects are out of bounds?

STOMP*


----------



## endora60 (Jan 5, 2006)

MARIS61 said:


> No need to imagine in Sheed's case.
> 
> Just ask to see his jewelry.


:::shrug::::

Darko has the same jewelry. Does that make him a leader?

Laurie


----------



## CatchNRelease (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> first you cry a river that you aren't rehashing your past posts, then when I demonstrate that thats exactly what you're doing you change the subject and go on the attack. Nice... that pretty much encapsulates my experience in our debates


As far as MY experience with you, this rehashing truly does encapsulate my experience in our debates. You require links to anything I say, yet you don’t offer up links to the things that you make up and portray as fact. Let me refresh your memory:



STOMP said:


> Remember when you started a new thread slamming him [Wallace] for being accused of assualting a woman? Since you called me out personally as if you really had something I'm sure you do... if only you'd have looked up the history of that incident before you gleefully relayed it years after the fact...





STOMP said:


> Well I was wrong… sort of. You didn’t start the link, but you did personally call me out early on in it completely out of the blue thinking you might finally be onto something… too bad you choose to do so on such pathetic grounds, eh Bob?


Is this what you mean by calling someone out personally, out of the blue, with something unrelated to what was being discussed? Without any basis, I might also add, since you didn’t provide a link that disputes the *2* links I provided on the subject. I thought you’d provide a link, LIKE I DID, or admit that once again, you’re making up silly stuff, in an effort to make me look foolish. What’s up with that?

According to the links I supplied, Wallace ***DID*** assault that woman, even if you don’t want to believe it. Wallace apologized and agreed to counseling and community service. What more do you need as evidence? Why the hell SHOULDN’T I have brought that up as yet ANOTHER reason that shows that Wallace is an *******? 



> It doesn't, but thats cool… and really it's nothing personal. In general I don’t add my untraceable first hand experiences or what I heard on the radio to heated discussions here because we really don’t know each other enough to take each others words without at least withholding some doubts... well maybe you and Bob do.


Care to explain how that’s any different than you maintaining, for years, that the coaches said that they wanted Wallace to play on the perimeter, Potty? Link me up, or give it up, big boy.



> Btw, I thought it was pretty funny when in prior threads you'd list Bob and CatchNRelease (along with TH, Terrible and Jackie Jackel) as like minded people in arguements you'd have with others.


Still waiting on the links to these revelations. I thanked those three for showing I wasn’t alone in thinking Wallace is a jerk, and not worth the trouble. You want to make it something more. You claim I said this in “threads”, plural. Is this another case of you making up lies to, in your mind at least, bolster your argument? Link up or shut up.



> You're contention that he plays on the outside because he doesn't like contact and that he floats outside against the will of his coaches, while a valid opinion to hold, is not supported by either quotes from those coaches or by his history as a Blazer and now a Piston.


This is my personal favorite. You’ve been spouting this crap for years, but yet you have NEVER provided a link to a Blazers coach saying anything like this to support your bleep. Not only that, you BLASTED another poster, a couple of weeks ago, for having the audacity to say that Wallace said that he wouldn’t have re-signed with Portland, and not give a link. What’s good for the goose, isn’t good for the gander, eh, Blackie? So, get the hell outta here with that weak bleep.



> only because I'm walking on eggshells trying to avoid having you blow another gasket and have your anger distort the issues I've been trying to discuss.


:laugh: You walk on eggshells when you debate me? That’s another good one, STOMP! Please, feel free to just let it ALL out, big guy.:meditate:



> Thats not what I said at all... did it _seem_ that way to you? Grant and Dale were not as good as Wallace at guarding anyone (IMO), but they also were not nearly as important to Portland's offensive attack as him. Are you really under the impression that Sheed or any player calls the shots on who they guard? Guarding the oppositions featured offensive player is a sure way for a defender to gather fouls. Conserving their star so as they can have him in with the game on the line is a commonly used tactic by coaches througout the league... thats why Shaq and Karl usually didn't guard Wallace until the 4th quarter either.


So, he’d *like* to guard the other best big, but needs to save his fouls for the end of the game. OR, he doesn’t like to guard the other best big, and the coach finds ways to make that work.



> AC Green was their weakass 4. Wallace consistently played well off of him and doubled down on Shaq every time they put it into the post.


OK, as a point of interest, do you think there’s more contact being the guy guarding Shaq, or the guy that sometimes doubles him?



> Dunlevy's stategy conserved Sheed's fouls and effectively slowed O'Neal down. Too bad PIP dislocated those fingers in game 6 and had to play game 7 one handed eh?


So, it’s not about liking/disliking contact, it’s about conserving his fouls, now? That, and the coach wanted him to play on the perimeter, (which I’m supposed to take your word on.)
Alternatively, Wallace could have guarded Shaq when Sabas was sitting, as he, by far was the best guy on our team to guard him, after Sabonis. It’s not like he should rack up a ton of fouls guarding AC. IMO, we already had a guy to deal with Shaq, but he didn’t want to do it.



> He's a high post center and rarely on the low block... which is why I think that he and SAR are a good match at the 4 and 5. I thought it was your contention that thats where centers played... sorry.


No need to say sorry when you're not...it could come off as disingenuous, don't you think? IF Wallace played the C, and alternated between low post and high post, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. I’m talking about Wallace making a soft effort to establish post position, get pushed out of there, then floating out to the perimeter.



> Why didn't Malone guard Wallace until the 4th? When the game was on the line (in the 4th), Sheed guarded Karl and usually Portland emerged with the W. Grant usually took the cheapshots from your favorite deadbeat dad/flopper until then.


OR, he could have guarded Karl for the entire game, taken the lumps, and then the game’s not on the line at the end? Instead, Wallace guarded who, until the game was on the line? (I’m think’n he guarded someone less physical than Malone.)
BTW, this sad little straw man you’ve constructed with Malone is taking one hell of a beating. Try to follow the bouncing ball, OK? I used Malone as an example of a “PHYSICAL” PF. I didn’t say he is my “favorite deadbeat dad/flopper”, you’re just making that up, cause you don’t have much else to come at me with. Provide some links to me holding Karl up as a good character guy, or shut the hell up with the pathetic BS.:whatever: 
As another point of interest, what do you think is worse, a deadbeat dad/flopper, or a guy that assaults women?



> Yup, though Karl opperated both from the low block and the high post. Especially as he got older, he relied more and more on his 15 foot jumper... and flopping. When he went to the Lakers Karl played almost exclusively at the high post.


He was hardly exclusively at the high post in the games I watched. As you noted, he played both. And, he and Shaq complimented each other’s post games. (No that doesn’t mean that Malone had to stand on Shaq’s block.)



> none of those listed feature both on the low post at the same time... I don't know what else to tell you. I'd have the same reaction if you'd claim the sky was green.


I’ll assume you’re just talking about O when you say that, as lots of times both of those pairs of guys played in the post at the same time on the defensive side of the ball. So, of the pairs listed above, which of them floated around the arc, instead of taking turns playing in the post? Of those guys, my recollection is more that they both played around the post, with only one in the low post at a time….they weren’t flitting around the arc when they weren’t in the post. I'm pretty sure you'd want a link if I said the sky was green.



> Joel and Theo are a prime example of poor chemistry because neither can operate outside the low block.. actually Theo can't operate effectively anywhere in an offensive set IMO.


And, even so, there’s room for Zach to play in the low post…help me understand your point.



> Bill and Luke are on the opposite end of the chemisty perspective. Luke was always on the low post, Bill with his great passing always on the high. Great combo. It's also great when guys can switch up to take advantage when they've a mismatch.


Walton was “always” on the high block? We’ll have to just disagree about that. The sets often started with Bill in the high post as the playmaker. Once he passed the ball off, he rotated down into the lane to rebound. And, when the chips were down, he played on the low block….LOTS of the time.



> btw, you listing Tag and Karl... :laugh:


I thought you’d like that. Just keep’n it light hearted. :cheers:



> I've done enough research for you, put up or...


Well, being’s how this is at the heart of your argument of years now, seems like ***YOU*** need to "put up or …”. I asked for a link to this story 2-3 years ago, never have seen one. Odd, considering that you blasted another poster, BIG TIME, a couple of weeks ago for claiming that Wallace said that he wouldn’t have resigned with Portland, and didn’t provide a link. Isn’t this *your* rule...if you can’t post a link, it simply didn’t happen?



> snorathon


Head-in-sand-athon



> you've claimed that you don't watch the Pistons... and you're demonstrating it.


Well, I have to admit I based that on statistics more than watching the Pistons. If he’s not playing outside more this year, why did he have more 3 point attempts, as of two weeks ago, than he had all season last year?



> Seriously whats your problem with comprehension? I've stated previously that I'm not a fan of everything Sheed brought to the floor, and was not a fan of his on court antics. I didn't like Techs or his outbursts, yet I recognise the good qualities he brought as well.


ADD? :whoknows: And yet, you wanted to keep Wallace for his ability....but you wouldn't want Kobe on the team. What's up with that?
You’re the one that pointed out that one reason he doesn’t/shouldn’t play in the post is his relationship with the refs. I’m simply pointing out that he caused the problem, so that’s just another excuse.



> 33% from 3 point range equals 50% from 2 point range in point production... need me to do the math for you? Plus a legit big man 3 pt threat pulls a big out to the perimeter to defend that shot. That allows others to exploit an open lane... I know I know thats a tough concept to understand, but in the end it equals a better shot at a W.


Yeah! Do the math for me….because the point you are trying to make is not borne out by the math, any more than it is by you making up excuses for him. Provide a little backup for a change, though, would ya? Nobody's forcing you to make this stuff up, big boy.



> If this is really your logic instead of yet another lame attempt to insult me, shouldn't you have left the Blazer forum free of your opinions during Wallace's era?


No, like I told you back then, I did quit going to games. I wanted to post how the dark, vile side of Blazers fandom felt about Wallace, in hopes that management would see that there were fans that would vote with their wallets if Wallace didn’t get dumped. Remember how you gave me the rolling eyes smiley for saying that I thought Blazers management would see my comments on the forum? Do you still think it’s stupid to believe that the Blazers are aware of what’s said here….given that ex-Blazers employees have said the Blazers have monitored the site via interns for some time, and that some of the announcers monitor this site? If you no longer think that’s stupid, how’s about a bil 'ol, “I sure was WRONG about that!”?
You might want to go back and note who started the insults.



> I think the _"you don't live here"_ stuff (yet again) shows off just how desperate you are to fling anything/everything my way. Way to go. My favorite team sucks, I'm not happy about that, it seems perfectly appropriate to me that I vent my thoughts on a message board for said team. There are few parameters here for whats to be discussed only no baiting, swearing, or spamming. Yeah, I'm sure I'm in the right place. You on the other hand... maybe you should go start your own board where some subjects are out of bounds?
> 
> STOMP


Talk about cry’n a river…

The players suck. Team sucks. Piss poor management. Players are spoiled babies. Starting backcourt are scrubs, (and presumably suck?). Theo and SAR are drek. You make sarcastic comments about watching the young guys develop. And, it’s all about winning for you. What part of that is incorrect?
As for the ‘you don’t live here’, bleep…I really don’t give a rip where you live. I was only pointing out that you don’t have a geographical connection to this team, and in fact, have teams that are closer to where you live that are doing better than this sucky one about which I would have a tough time pointing to something you like. Additionally, you imply that you watch the Pistons a lot. If it’s really all about winning for you, that team would seem to be a natural, and there are at least three guys you actually like on that team.

If I follow your contention correctly, Wallace has no problem with banging with the big boys. But, on defense, he would foul out too quickly to guard the physical players, and on offense, well, he’d like to bang, but he’s just doing what the coach wants…cause he’s better flitting around the perimeter. Okey dokey. While it's ok for you to have that opinion, it's just your opinion, and anything but fact.

I’ve provided examples of C/PF combos that compliment each other’s games on O. I’ve acknowledged that Wallace is capable of guarding the best bigs, and would have done the best job of guarding them. But yet he didn’t.

I'd bet that there was at least one better perimeter shooter on every roster Wallace played on for the Blazers. I'd almost bet that there was more than one. It doesn't make sense that the Blazers had to have him floating around the arc like a SG, or that the coach wanted that.

Go Blazers


----------

