# How the once thought mighty have fallen



## voice of reality (Sep 20, 2003)

Antoine walker according to cuban will be exposed to the upcoming expansion draft. cuban cites antoines attitude and non team play..


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

I doubt Charolette will select him and I believe Cuban is bluffing. Antoine would take up almost half of Charolette's salary (About 28 Million). Antoine will play out his contact in Dallas.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

I don't think him being exposed is evidence of him having "fallen." It says that they know he won't be picked, and they'd prefer to protect eight other players who could be picked if they were left unprotected.

Not saying he hasn't fallen, just that this isn't really as rough as it sounds.


----------



## voice of reality (Sep 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MJG</b>!
> I don't think him being exposed is evidence of him having "fallen." It says that they know he won't be picked, and they'd prefer to protect eight other players who could be picked if they were left unprotected.
> 
> Not saying he hasn't fallen, just that this isn't really as rough as it sounds.


But this is aw who a lot of fans in boston were making out to be this great all star..


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>voice of reality</b>!
> 
> 
> But this is aw who a lot of fans in boston were making out to be this great all star..


Walker was traded for LaFrentz. I think that spoke to how little value was placed on him more than being unprotected in the expansion draft. It's no secret that things weren't going so well for him in Dallas. I hope he gets in a situation where he can flourish, but he's no longer a Celtic and probably never will be again, so I can't waste too much thought on him.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>voice of reality</b>!
> Antoine walker according to cuban will be exposed to the upcoming expansion draft. cuban cites antoines attitude and non team play..


Yeah I saw that, all Cuban said is that he'll leave "Walk" unprotected, or try to work out a deal with him. Not once did he say anything about his attitude or his team play. But nice try to bring him down.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>voice of reality</b>!
> 
> 
> But this is aw who a lot of fans in boston were making out to be this great all star..


Oh, it's great how you guys use the "He was never an all-star" to prove something against him, but then you use "he was an all-star, and should have goten us to the finals" to prove another.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Can't deny he has fallen, but...*

I wish Walker the best. They'd be very foolish not to protect him, though. He is valuable is an obscenely high expiring contract. I'd protect him.


----------



## voice of reality (Sep 20, 2003)

They have other players to protect that they feel are worth more.. 

Lets get this straight walker was traded for lafrentz and delk was traded for welsch and a first round pick?? LOL

I think that cubans comments regarding walker were right on. He was not happy with his role(was asked to submit to the best of the team).. Cuban also said nelson will be manning the phones trying to peddle him.. Gosh think he will get any takers?? Btw i would consider an aw staright up for raef trade .. LMAO... Dallas can have raefs contract back and we will tell aw to go play golf..


----------



## voice of reality (Sep 20, 2003)

*Re: Can't deny he has fallen, but...*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> I wish Walker the best. They'd be very foolish not to protect him, though. He is valuable is an obscenely high expiring contract. I'd protect him.


I absolutely wish aw as a person the best too.. My hope and prayer is this motivates him similarly to the way manny ramirez is a different person after being waived by the sox last off season.. Maybe aw should go to chicago.. i dont know if the business sense of doing this is wise but cuban has his reasons.. He has to be doing some serious evaluating of that team, to see them fold continually in the playoffs.. He absolutely has to find a defensive center to offset dirk..


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

I watched at least 75 of the games Dallas played this year and one thing Antoine wasn't was selfish.
He bent over backwords to do whatever they wanted him to.
He carried the team for the first two months of the season when everyone was hurt or too busy to be bothered.
Then he was told to change everything he did. 
If he was being selfish he would have told Dallas and their fans to
(fill in any bad word you can think of here) but he didn't.

I wish he wasn't such a gamer because if I was him I would not opt out of my contract and sit on their bench and earn my money for free for the entire year. There is no way I would opt out and free up the money for them.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

Don Nelson wanted him because he thought he would thrive as point forward. They discovered what an overated passer and turnover machine he is. One telling stat is his average points compared to his average shots. He routinely scores less points then shot attempts because he doesn't draw fouls and shoots at a low percentage. His overbearing personality and stubborness probably wore thin in Dallas. How many times did Boston lose to Chicago mainly because Walker had to be "the man" in front of his home town fans and would take and miss too many wild shots.

Cuban has come to same conclusion as Ainge: Getting rid of Walker is addition by subtraction.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> Don Nelson wanted him because he thought he would thrive as point forward. They discovered what an overated passer and turnover machine he is.


He's one of the best point forwards in the league. If you want to call someone a "turnover machine", the guy plays near the Tobin Bridge here in Boston.



> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> How many times did Boston lose to Chicago mainly because Walker had to be "the man" in front of his home town fans and would take and miss too many wild shots.


We are STILL losing to Chicago, so that can't be right.



> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> Cuban has come to same conclusion as Ainge: Getting rid of Walker is addition by subtraction.


Yeah, that got us somewhere. :laugh: 1st Round playoff exit and losing by double digits EVERY game. Not to mention being 10 games under .500 and making the playoffs.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

Yes, we still lose to Chicago but they are a little better and we were a lot worse. When Toine would single handedly ensure defeat with 5 for 23 shooting against Chicago they were worse than Orlando was this year. You'd think that an Antoine and Delk for Jiri Welsch trade would have left this team in the cellar yet they were in 2nd place and just a game or 2 behind NJ when O'Brien quit on the team. Dallas, which had best record in the NBA last year was a first round and out this year!

As far as Pierce and turnovers go the reason is obvious - he tried to do too much and had no other marquis player to rely on. However, the guy has the talent to be a key ingredient on a great team - not so with Walker. Trade Pierce for Kobe straight up and LA Lakers still win it all and Boston still goes nowhere. Trade Walker for Kobe straight up and LA is lucky to get past 2nd round and Dallas probably wins it all.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> Dallas, which had best record in the NBA last year was a first round and out this year!


And somehow this is Walker's fault? Last time I checked, Dallas has Nowitzki, Nash, Finley, and Jamison, too. Somehow, I don't think that keeping LaFrentz (who wouldn't have played this year) and Welsch (who would've had a hard time getting playing time) would have made the result any better. They still can't defend, and one guy isn't going to make a difference. That's a team concept. 

I don't buy that addition by subtraction bull. Nothing was added to the Celtics. What do the Celtics have now that they didn't have before? They were only in a fairly good position when OB left because the Atlantic division was pitiful. Plus, Eric Williams was playing at a fairly high level, and the improved play of Baker helped them win some games early on. It certainly was not because Walker was gone. We'll never know, but I think if Walker had been here, our record would've been much better. It's probably true we still wouldn't have had what it takes to compete for a championship, but the argument is that the Celtics are no better off and probably worse than before the Walker trade. LaFrentz has a bad contract, and we still don't know if the surgery fixed all his problems. We picked up a bunch of guys from losing teams. Only one rookie was developed, and even that wasn't very much. The one guy who really improved - Blount - is leaving the team. Pierce's play declined, and it's clear he's not the leader Walker was. 

I hope Ainge's plan comes together, and we get the people we need, but it's not looking too good. Walker wasn't golden, but he and Delk were worth more than LaFrentz and Welsch.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> Yes, we still lose to Chicago but they are a little better and we were a lot worse. When Toine would single handedly ensure defeat with 5 for 23 shooting against Chicago they were worse than Orlando was this year. You'd think that an Antoine and Delk for Jiri Welsch trade would have left this team in the cellar yet they were in 2nd place and just a game or 2 behind NJ when O'Brien quit on the team. Dallas, which had best record in the NBA last year was a first round and out this year!
> 
> As far as Pierce and turnovers go the reason is obvious - he tried to do too much and had no other marquis player to rely on. However, the guy has the talent to be a key ingredient on a great team - not so with Walker. Trade Pierce for Kobe straight up and LA Lakers still win it all and Boston still goes nowhere. Trade Walker for Kobe straight up and LA is lucky to get past 2nd round and Dallas probably wins it all.


You seem to be arguing against yourself in this post. Walker was awful, but "we were a lot worse" this past year without him. The Celtics were a game or two behind NJ in second place this year, but the Nets were struggling horribly and weren't that far over .500 at the time, meanwhile the Walkerless Celtics weren't really approaching that number at all. Dallas, which had the best record last year was out in the first round, but so were the Celtics, after upsetting teams on their way to the Conference Finals and the second round in the last two seasons with Walker.

Also, Walker is the reason for all evil in the earth and the downfall of the Mavericks, but you imply that he is a "marquee player." And the thing about the Kobe deals is waaaaaay off base. If the Lakers dealt Kobe for Antoine, they'd still kill the Mavs. If the Celtics dealt Pierce for Kobe, they'd be vastly improved because the star of the team wouldn't disappear for long stretches of time, only popping up to make momentum breaking turnovers and showing a ridiculous and inexcuseable lack of hustle.

You can't have it both ways. Antoine Walker can't be the reason for the Mavericks losing in the first round and the lack of Antoine Walker can't be the reason for Paul Pierce playing poorly this season. Its one or the other. Either Antoine is good and helps his team and helped Paul Pierce become a star, or Antoine sucks and the deal improved the team and had no impact on Paul's season.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

I didn't blame Walker for Pierce's bad play - and I agree Paul had it easier with another guy who could play well against the weaker teams. I like Antoine. He plays hard and wants to win badly. I liked Jeff Hornacek too - I just wouldn't expect a guy of that talent level to get maximum salary and 20 plus shots a game.


I happen to think Paul Pierce is a great talent and if paired with another stellar talent can do a lot of damage in this league. Imagine how good he would be if he played with Shaq and Shaq were getting triple teamed and not him. I think Kobe is better than Pierce but his offense if helped tremendously by playing with Shaq.

Face the facts. If the game is on the line do you want Antoine with the ball getting double teamed? The answer is definitely NO. There are at least 40 players in the league that are better scorers and take fewer shots per game than he did in Boston.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> I didn't blame Walker for Pierce's bad play - and I agree Paul had it easier with another guy who could play well against the weaker teams. I like Antoine. He plays hard and wants to win badly. I liked Jeff Hornacek too - I just wouldn't expect a guy of that talent level to get maximum salary and 20 plus shots a game.
> 
> 
> ...


I guess that this year we have found out that shooting a higher % doesn't mean more wins. I don't give a **** what a player shoots, as long as we win. We never had a dominate player, but add a couple of guys around those two and we'd be a million times better.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

Just add a few good players and we'll be better? How do you add to Pierce and Walker when they were both max salary players? Just adding a few good players didn't help Dallas did it? 

Is that what you want - a team that will never contend for a title but wins 45 games and then loses badly in the playoffs to the team that gets swept by the Lakers or Spurs?

The only way this Celtics team can ever compete is to add another star player to compliment Pierce or to build a cohesive team ala Sacramento. Neither was possible with Walker around unless he would accept a pay cut which he never would have done here.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> Just add a few good players and we'll be better? How do you add to Pierce and Walker when they were both max salary players? Just adding a few good players didn't help Dallas did it?


It takes more than adding a few good players to get to a championship level, but that's a start. We did have Walker, Pierce, and Baker on the payroll. Now we have Pierce, LaFrentz, and I'm a little fuzzy on the details, but I think Baker's money is still on the books in some capacity. If the Baker deal hadn't happened, I think we would've had a lot more wiggle room to attract another quality player. But because Gaston wanted to save a million dollars and screw the team at the same time the year he sold the team, the likelihood of having a third star became pretty slim. 

What I don't like is that Ainge traded away our second star and didn't get a star in return. I really doubt LaFrentz will be a star quality player. He may provide some decent help, but I don't see him being an impact player. Walker may not have made the best decisions or taken the best shots, but he was an impact player. There was a reason other teams double-teamed him. There was a reason he was voted onto the All-Star team by the coaches. He could shoot like crap all game, but you still didn't leave him alone because he was still dangerous in other ways. Teams had to shut down Walker and Pierce, and that was difficult to do. Now teams are simply determined to shut down Pierce and are willing to let other players try to beat them - even Davis. And that worked great. They took Pierce out, and the rest of the team wasn't good enough to win. Until that changes, Pierce is going to continue to be double and triple-teamed, and he's going to continue to commit turnovers and shoot poorly. Also, the officials hated Walker so much that Pierce got all the calls. Now Pierce doesn't get those calls anymore.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> Just add a few good players and we'll be better? How do you add to Pierce and Walker when they were both max salary players? Just adding a few good players didn't help Dallas did it?


Anyone would have helped. Outside of Walker and Pierce who else was worth mentioning? The drunk Baker? Walter McCarty? Bruno Sundov? Ruben Wolkowitzki? 

All star team right there, right? 
How do we add players? 
How did Dallas get 5 all-star players?



> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> Is that what you want - a team that will never contend for a title but wins 45 games and then loses badly in the playoffs to the team that gets swept by the Lakers or Spurs?


Like it or not, I had a lot of trust in this team. This team could have won against any team in the league on any given night, but not NJ. We always played better against better teams, we even did well against the Lakers, Spurs and Kings.



> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> The only way this Celtics team can ever compete is to add another star player to compliment Pierce or to build a cohesive team ala Sacramento. Neither was possible with Walker around unless he would accept a pay cut which he never would have done here.


I'm pretty sure he wouldn't, because every team in the nba is just waiting to give Walker a 20 million per year contract.  
Walker wouldn't have gotten a maximum contract from anyone, so if one team offered him 5 M we could have offered 6. If someone gave him the max, the worse that could have happen to us is free up Cap Space.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

Walker and Pierce never beat a team from Texas. In fact O'Brien never beat a team from Texas until they beat Dallas and Walker this year. The Celtics could have built around Walker and Pierce but they screwed it up so much and wasted so much salary cap doing it that one had to go and I think they made the right choice keeping Pierce. Imagine if they had Stoudemire, Richard Jefferson, Tony Parker, Chauncey Billups, Shawn Marion, Ben Wallace ( Pitino decided to sign Riley from Michigan instead ), Andre Miller...... to go along with Pierce and Walker... And people actually think Ainge ruined the team.

Time will tell if I am right but 2-3 years from now Walker and Delk for LaFrentz, Welsch and perhaps Dorrell Wright won't look like a bad deal.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Pierce go next if Davis and Welsch improve because they still need a great big man if they ever want to win.


----------



## voice of reality (Sep 20, 2003)

i posted this in jest on another forum, so here goes.. Aw for pp and then we see who the better player is.. LOL Oh and to make it totally fair danny has to make two trades and doc has to have a brain annuerism.. LOL


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>voice of reality</b>!
> i posted this in jest on another forum, so here goes.. Aw for pp and then we see who the better player is.. LOL Oh and to make it totally fair danny has to make two trades and doc has to have a brain annuerism.. LOL


That was totaly random....anyway back to the topic, I'd take McGrady over Walter McCarty any day of the week.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

LOL I love when people say Pierce was bad because he didn't have Walker but then say (in the same breath) that Walker is just a bad player and overrated.
These same people say Pierce needs another great player to help him, well IMO then he isn't worth the money he is making.

Antoine worked his butt off for Dallas and the Pierce fanatics only want to remember the second half of the year when Walker was told "This is Dirk's team, he shoots the ball"
Funny how we didn't see these kinds of threads when Walker was allowed to play and carried Dallas for the first half of the year.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

To say that Pierce needs another great player to compete for a championship does not validate Walker or imply that Pierce is deficient. Garnett, Shaq, Duncan and Kobe also need other great players to win. Jordan didn't win until Pippen came on board.

Reason Celtics got swept by Nets 2 years ago and reason Celtics did so poorly against Indiana is that they have had no interior players capable of carrying the load. Pierce is a very good player but not good enough to deliver a championship on his own. Not good enough to deliver one with Walker as the #2 option. 

To say that Pierce's play suffered without 
Walker is not inconsistent with the point that Walker was not worth keeping and was not worth max salary. It is not inconsistent with saying the the trade was lopsided towards Boston either. When all 3 players are on the court the team will be better with trade then they would be with Walker. People who thought Ainge should get more for Walker refuse to accept what his real value is. When he becomes free agent it will be impossible to deny how far his stock has fallen any longer.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> 
> 
> To say that Pierce's play suffered without
> Walker is not inconsistent with the point that Walker was not worth keeping and was not worth max salary. It is not inconsistent with saying the the trade was lopsided towards Boston either. When all 3 players are on the court the team will be better with trade then they would be with Walker. People who thought Ainge should get more for Walker refuse to accept what his real value is. When he becomes free agent it will be impossible to deny how far his stock has fallen any longer.


1) Who's really worth their max contracts but a selected few?
2) We could have gotten Walker cheaper then at the max.
3) If Walker was the WORST PLAYER EVER, his CONTRACT alone had a TON of value.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

Before I respond I would like to say that this has been a great discussion. 

It seems that your last point is the most valid. Walker's only value to this team was as an expiring contract and perhaps would have been better to let him walk rather than get: a #1 pick in a draft where quality could actually slip to a low 1st round, a former lottery pick with a 10 mil/yr long term contract and a #13 pick who should have been picked higher.

I disagree because I forsee a situation where Walker walks away for nothing and the Celtics end up signing a Rasha Nesterovic type for big money so as not to lose the slot a la the defending champion Spurs. Straight up La Frenz is better than Walker and has played well with Pierce in the past. At least he can defend, get offensive rebounds, block shots, and take shots in the flow of an offense without hurting team. His salary is not so big as to prevent team from future signings - such as midlevel exception this year. Welsch and #1 pick is gravy in my opinion.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> Before I respond I would like to say that this has been a great discussion.


Yup, that's why I just gave you a 5. 



> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> It seems that your last point is the most valid. Walker's only value to this team was as an expiring contract and perhaps would have been better to let him walk rather than get: a #1 pick in a draft where quality could actually slip to a low 1st round, a former lottery pick with a 10 mil/yr long term contract and a #13 pick who should have been picked higher.


If the #1 pick was available, don't you think that Howard or Okafor would be a nice "little" addition to our team? I'd rather have the 1st pick then the 24 (or 25), at the 1st pick you can still get that player that "slipped down".



> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> I disagree because I forsee a situation where Walker walks away for nothing and the Celtics end up signing a Rasha Nesterovic type for big money so as not to lose the slot a la the defending champion Spurs. Straight up La Frenz is better than Walker and has played well with Pierce in the past. At least he can defend, get offensive rebounds, block shots, and take shots in the flow of an offense without hurting team. His salary is not so big as to prevent team from future signings - such as midlevel exception this year. Welsch and #1 pick is gravy in my opinion.


Well if Danny's as stupid to sign a Nesterovic well....I wouldn't mind seeing Kenyon Martin, Kobe or Rasheed Wallace here. Some other nice players not worth the max Turkoglu, Ginobili, Quentin Richardson, Miles, Brian Cardinal (I love this guy), Okur, Daniels, Eric Williams, Jamal Crawford. 

There's plenty to pick from, so I don't think Danny will get a "Rasho"

IMO, Raef isn't even close to Walker. Walker brought a lot more to this team then just put up stats. Walker is a better defender then people give him credit for, and he's a better rebound (especially offensive) then Reaf, but he isn't a shoot blocker. 

But just because Reaf can block a few shots doesn't mean he's a great defender. If it does then Dirk would be the one of the best defender this postseason.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

Antoine is a good defensive rebounder but isn't nearly as effective an offensive rebounder.

His contract runs out next year so none of the players you named would be coming to the Celtics in his slot.

With MLE we might get Okur or even Q. Richardson or Brent Barry which would make the trade look even better.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> Antoine is a good defensive rebounder but isn't nearly as effective an offensive rebounder.


The only reason he wasn't an effective offensive rebounder is that he played away from the basket way too much. He was used as a point forward and was given the green light to jack up threes, both of which put him in no position to grab a rebound. In Dallas he averaged 2.4 offensive rebounds a game - up from 1.3 the previous year in Boston. His rookie year he averaged 3.5 offensive rebounds per game. He's a very effective offensive rebounder when he's told to play where a power forward is supposed to play. Heinsohn stated on several occasions he has some of the best hands in the game, if only he were under the basket more. 

If utilized correctly, Walker is extremely valuable. He averaged a double-double the first part of the season in Dallas until his role changed. OB didn't use his potential effectively. Part of it had to do with not having a true point guard, and the other part was his obsession with the three. Walker had his flaws but I think a lot of them can be attributed to the coaching style. His strengths weren't capitalized on. Dallas was a good fit at first, but with Nash, Finley, Nowitzki, and Jamison, there just wasn't enough ball to go around. I think Walker would thrive on a three (maybe four) star team, but not five. I think he could've had that in Boston if they'd found a third star. Baker might've been that had he not started drinking again.


----------



## theBirdman (Jun 20, 2003)

What is so bad about Nesterovic? He has done a good job for the Spurs this year! He is no star and he knows it. He is a role player who was getting 5.6 million $ this year! Is that too much?

I think he is well worth it! He is a team player and does many little things which are not seen in the boxscores. That is why fans dont like him but Popovic does. And when Duncan was out he showed that he can be effective as well, averaging a double double!


I have to step up for a fellow countryman!


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*The Damn Threes*

O'Brien isn't the only one obsessed with threes. Antoine shot 305 three pointers last year, in 400 less minutes than last year. 

Power forward, my arse.

Oh and he only made 82 of them...he's a 27% shooter from the arc, only slightly worse than his 55% mark from the free throw line.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

*Re: The Damn Threes*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> O'Brien isn't the only one obsessed with threes. Antoine shot 305 three pointers last year, in 400 less minutes than last year.


Excessive, but still less than half what he took in the 00-01 season, and it certainly wasn't half the minutes. In 00-01, he took 1 three every 5.3 minutes. Last year, he took 1 three every 9.3 minutes (these are based on minutes on the floor, not 48 minutes). That's a significant drop. Nelson does like the three, though. Nowitzki is a C-F, and he took almost as many. LaFrentz also took a lot when he was in Dallas. Granted, they were more accurate, at least in terms of last year, but they're still big men taking threes. In the 00-01 season, Walker actually shot a higher percentage than Nowitzki did last year. 

Walker hasn't played for a coach that didn't have him taking threes. He was best under Pitino, but only in comparison to OB. Pitino liked the three, too. Get him on a team with a coach that will make him play near the basket, and I can almost guarantee he'll play more efficiently.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Yes, you are correct, sir*

But my point still stands....Antoine LOVES to take threes.

Of course, you picked a season three years ago against Nowitzki's worst to somehow justify Walker's stupid shot selection.

Let's look at the numbers, shall we?

Walker

99-00 73-285 (.256)
*00-01 221-603 (.367)* 
01-02 222-645 (.344)
02-03 188-582 (.323)
03-04 82-305 (.269)

Do you notice a trend?

Walker is a career 32% three point shooter
LaFrentz is a career 36% three point shooter
Nowitzki is a career 37% three point shooter

There is no comparison...Walker was once a multi-skilled player who could have been an elite guy...Now he is a chucker...who is being ridiculed by GMs, coaches and people other than Danny Ainge. Don't compare Walker's shot with LaFrentz or Nowitzki, who are pure shooters. Walker is not a pure shooter. He is a passer, a creator, a "point forward," if you will, but not a shooter.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

*Re: Yes, you are correct, sir*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> 
> 99-00 73-285 (.256)
> *00-01 221-603 (.367)*
> ...


Yes. The trend is from 00 to 03 he shot a lot more threes. The coach during those years? OB. The two years sandwiching those years were under a different coach, and he took half the number of threes. I never said he was a pure shooter. However, OB didn't care. He told Walker to play the point and shoot threes, and so he did. You can't tell me those 3 years were merely a coincidence. Even though Nelson doesn't like the three as much as OB, he still likes it enough to have his big men shooting them. Most coaches would just use it as an occasional weapon.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*mrsister*

You are right about O'Brien...and that will continue in Philly. But I think Nelson liked having Raef and Dirk shoot them because they could. Manute Bol could. Walker can't, and that is why his butt was more often on the bench at the end of the season and in the playoffs.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

Yes, lets blame O'Brien for Walker's deficiencies. Of course, the franchise was going nowhere until O'Brien took over and what did he do? He gave the ball to Pierce and let him score. Under Pitino Pierce was not getting the shots he obviously deserved. Similar to what happened to TMac when he left Toronto and got out from under Vince Carter's shadow.

As far as rebounding, I stand by my contention. I suppose Pierce and Blount are great rebounders too given their stats this year. Players like Ben Wallace or Dennis Rodman are great rebounders because they go get the ball and keep everyone else off the boards, allowing wing players to take off on the break. Walker does not rebound that well - he can pad the stats like Larry did but for a power forward he couldn't control the glass - ie. keep Kenyon Martin off the offensive boards. Honestly, Walker will never make the All Star team for his rebounding and he will never average above 10/game like the elite power forwards and centers do so to mention his rebounding as a reason to keep him at maximum salary is a joke.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

Raef is hardly a better player then Walker. The guy does nothing but block a few shots. Now you are giving him credit for playing well with Pierce 6 years ago in College? Funny I don't remember that team dominating College ball and winning any NCAA title, In fact I remember them once again choking. That and Pierce being lazy and soft was part of the reason his stock dropped him all the way to tenth. (Beyond the Glory)

You are right about one thing, Walker spent most of the playoffs on the bench and look where that series turned out. Dallas couldn't beat a healthy Chris Webber led team the year before (they lost game 1 and were losing game 2 till Webber got hurt)
and they weren't doing it again this year. Walker and his 25 minutes a game weren't going to change that and they weren't responcible for the play of Steve Nash and Michael Finley either.


If Walker sucks so bad then please explain to me why Pierce fell apart with out him? Oh that is right, he needs another All Star to show up for the first 3 quarters and keep the team in the game till Pierce decides to show up for his usual one quarter.

Funny how that didn't work out for him this year.

Walker takes too many 3's but he also took ALL the last second shot clock winding down shots in Dallas. Steve Nash had a few and Walekr had 2 of his 3's a game doing that kind of shot.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> Yes, lets blame O'Brien for Walker's deficiencies.


Walker was deficient in his ability to hit the three. That's not OB's fault. However, having Walker play so far away from the basket had a lot to do with OB. You can't tell me a coach doesn't make a difference. So many players have left teams or gotten a new coach, and it's made a world of difference. Walker played quite well the first half of the season for Dallas. Nash and Nowitzki weren't playing all that hot. Then they stepped it up, and Jamison played solidly, so Walker wasn't needed as much.



> Walker does not rebound that well - he can pad the stats like Larry did but for a power forward he couldn't control the glass - ie. keep Kenyon Martin off the offensive boards.


How do you pad rebounding stats? Either you get the ball or you don't. Only one person can grab a rebound. It's not like scoring where you can just keep taking shots all the time and eventually some fall in. With rebounding, the only way you can pad is to miss intentionally and then get it back. I distinctly remember Walker was averaging double figures through much of the beginning of the season. Only 11 players did that this season, and several of them are centers. Even with his decline in play, he still wound up 20th in the league. 

I'm also not sure who's arguing to keep Walker at max salary. I don't think he's a max player either, but I do think he's a lot more valuable than many people give him credit for, and I definitely think he's worth more than Raef (talent-wise, not money). It's not like Raef's contract is anything to be smiling about.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

First of all, Pierce didn't fall apart this year. We all watched him hog the ball, force the issue leading to turnovers and shoot at a lower percentage than usual. But honestly, did anyone else in the league lead his team in points, assists and rebounds for as long as Pierce did? Walker has never had a season like Pierce did this year. When Walker was "the man" the team was a perenial lottery team. 

As far as hoisting three pointers, it was the only style that enabled him to utilize Walkers limited talents. If he could actually shoot 3 pointers for high percentage it would be difficult for power forwards to guard him but the problem is he can't shoot. Look at his form - it looks like he just tosses it up there. Speaking of form, how come a guy who gets paid 13 million can't keep in shape? 

My point about rebounds is that a player can have good numbers like Walker in Dallas and not actually be a great rebounder. Every team gets rebounds and every team has a player that is going to get 7-10 RPG.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Good point on the rebounds*

When you're playing at a faster tempo (like Dallas), there are more possessions, and therefore more shots. The fact that Walker averaged 7.2 in a slow-down game and a little more in an up-tempo game about equals out. He is not a great or even very good rebounder. 

Walker was on the bench because he was the least effective player of the options Nelson had. Rookies even played because they were better defenders. You gotta choose between Jamison and Walker, you take Jamison seven days a week and twice on Sunday. 

I'm curious to see what Raef and Walker do this season. Obviously, health will be a factor, but let's just see. I know Jiri will come to play.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> My point about rebounds is that a player can have good numbers like Walker in Dallas and not actually be a great rebounder. Every team gets rebounds and every team has a player that is going to get 7-10 RPG.


And if that player happens to be Walker then it doesn't mean anything? He was the second leading rebounder on the second best rebounding team in the league. It's not like he was surrounded by crappy rebounders, so he got all of them. 

Funny how people actually blame the uptempo style on him getting more rebounds. Perhaps if Boston had played that way, he would've played better. Also, he did come into the season in good shape and ready to run. He just never got a chance. No matter what Walker does everyone points to the one Nets series where Martin got the better of him as the defining moment in his entire career. Never mind the Pacers series where he was great and one of the main reasons they won. Never mind that in the fourth game of the Nets series he adjusted and got his game together and pushed it to double overtime. Players sometimes have bad series. Does everyone look at Payton and Malone now and discount their entire careers just because they haven't been stellar in the playoffs? 

You can tell me Walker isn't worth the max, and I'll agree with you. But to say that we came out ahead on the LaFrentz trade is ridiculous. We lost more than just stats. I hope Walker gets in a situation where he can prove doubters wrong, but I have a feeling he'll be bounced around and just fade away.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> 
> I hope Walker gets in a situation where he can prove doubters wrong, but I have a feeling he'll be bounced around and just fade away.


Which will, no doubt, be somebody else's fault. Not Antoine's.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

The funniest thing about this is Walker has out played Kenyon Martin in the majority of every other game he has played him but those 3 games where he was so injured he could barely walk.
The one game Antoine and Kenyon played in this year Walker out played Kenyon scoring 19 points in the second half when Kenyon and the Nets made their run. It was Walker who blocked Kenyon's shot and scored the points to build the lead back up.
Check out the stats for the 2002 playoff series where Antoine wasn't hurt either.

The NJ series is the excuse the Pierce fan uses when he has no point.

No one is saying Walker is perfect but when the Pierce fan starts his BS and tries to point out every bad game he ever had as the reason to why he isn't a good player it defies logic.


Pierce is never responsible for anything he does. The way he acted this year was deplorable. Right now Jiri Welsch hates him, Marcus Banks is sick of him and basically the only guys who could stand him by the end of the season were Kendrick, Walter and Mark Blount. Marcus Banks was walking around telling everyone who would listen just how sick he was of Paul after the very last game of the season. (that was printed in the Boston Herald)






> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

I have no doubt that Walker will just fade away because that is what happens to overrated players with limited talent. He will join the club with Glen Robinson, Abdur-Rahim, Gary Payton, Jalen Rose ....


----------



## voice of reality (Sep 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SamIam</b>!
> I have no doubt that Walker will just fade away because that is what happens to overrated players with limited talent. He will join the club with Glen Robinson, Abdur-Rahim, Gary Payton, Jalen Rose ....


Im not sure walker belongs in that club.. He just simply is not as good as payton, etc..


----------

