RollWithEm

I’m really glad you brought this up. I agree with you that Haywood is an excellent defender. If you want to claim he is better than Richard Jefferson defensively, I won’t dispute that with you. You might be right. I will dispute the other two, though.

First, Gerald Wallace is a very over-rated defender. I’ve seen somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 Bobcat games in the last few years. In several of these, I’ve focused very intently on Gerald Wallace because he’s been on my lat few fantasy teams. I’m not going to say he’s a sieve defensively because he does a decent job of moving his feet and staying in front of his man, but his help defense is almost nonexistent and he gambles way too much. I would venture to say that he’s the 3rd best defender in his own starting line-up. If you think he’s a better defender than Richard Jefferson, I think you’re probably basing that assessment on public perception or limited personal experience.

More importantly, calling Tyson Chandler a superior defender borders on being offensive to me. Yes, I know he came out of high school with the hype of being a great shot-blocker and defender who might one day develop an offensive game. I know his reputation in Chicago supported the hype. He was supposedly a great shot-blocker (on and off ball) and a dependable defensive stopper. This perception is part of the reason I was so excited when I found out he was coming to my hometown Hornets. I thought he would be exactly the type of presence this team needed in the paint.

So far he’s played in just under 150 games with the Hornets. I’ve seen about 30 of those in person and another 90 to 100 on television. In his first 50 or so games with the Hornets, he was amped up defensively. He patrolled the paint pretty effectively. His on-ball defense wasn’t exactly stellar, but his help defense was always on point. He communicated well with his teammates and hustled to spots. In the last 100 games, however, he’s fallen off remarkably. I can’t believe how many uncontested lay-ups he gives up to lesser players. He refuses to move his feet. He only hustles for loose balls if it’s the last 2 minutes of the game. He almost never communicates, and his help defense has become borderline atrocious. The fact that some people still consider him a “superior defender” actually boggles my mind. If he’s a better defender than Richard Jefferson, then he must also be a better shooter than Michael Redd. If it wasn’t for his above average defensive rebounding prowess, I would almost prefer if he didn’t even come down to that end of the floor. He spends more time bumping into his teammates that are trying to defend than he does actually playing defense.

I’m glad you gave me the opportunity to get that off my chest.

I think you are basing this statement on current-level Zach Randolph for the NY Knicks. I wouldn’t put that Randolph on this team either. 2006 Zach Randolph with 22 PER and 17.5 Reb Rate is more than deserving of a spot on this team, IMO. In fact, he’s the 3rd best player on the team. Outside of Gil and Pau, no one else on this whole roster impacts a game like 2006 Zach Randolph. Who else on this team will get you 24 PPG, 10 RPG, and 2 APG while shooting 47% from the field and 82% from the line? If you think for a second that any level Gerald Wallace, Mehmet Okur, Jason Richardson, or Tony Parker would be more effective in this style of tournament than 2006-level Zach Randolph, you’re kidding yourself. He was the type of back-to-the-basket force that coaches drool over. You say the team has more balance with Radman instead of Randolph. That’s like saying that you’d rather have prime Trenton Hassell over prime Ray Allen depending on what the rest of your roster looks like. It’s completely absurd. Randolph’s 2006 season was easily one of the top 5 seasons put up by a member of this draft class, and that’s all I’m interested in, here.

Wow. I can hardly believe what I’m reading. Sure, I know that Gil is sometimes selfish. I know that his teammates might not always get along with him. I know that a more unselfish guy might be a better fit for this team. The problem is that Tony Parker is JUST AS SELFISH as Gilbert Arenas. They’re actually pretty similar players. The only difference is that Gilbert is better at every single aspect of basketball except pure speed. He’s a better shooter, a better scorer, a better defender, a better creator, and arguably even a better finisher at the basket. He’s better in the clutch and he has better vision. He’s the better player, but is he the better fit for this team? I’d say, yes he is by a large margin. I mean we’re not talking about John Stockton: we’re talking about Tony Parker. Parker’s own coach barely trusts him.


You really think Calbert Cheaney would be the 6th man on this team? Let’s look at his best season, shall we? 1994 was the only year in his career he averaged over 16 PPG. It was the only season he shot over 80% from the line. It was the only season he averaged over one 3P made per game. He shot 45% from the field and 34% from three. His PER was a career high 14.2 and his TS% was 53. His defensive rating was a paltry 113. I’ll assume this is the prime-level Cal Cheaney you’re trying to include on this team.

It seems that you think he’s in the same class as Allan Houston and better than Isaiah Rider, Nick Van Exel, and Lucious Harris. Allan Houston had 9 seasons with a better TS%, 9 seasons with a better defensive rating, 8 seasons with a better PER, 8 seasons with more PPG, 11 seasons with a better FT%, and 11 seasons with a better 3P%. I would actually argue that Allan Houston’s worst seasons as a professional were better than Calbert Cheaney’s best seasons.

Nick Van Exel is in a similar boat. His worst seasons were right at or above Cheaney’s best seasons. He had PERs above the league average (15) during 9 different seasons in his career. Cheaney’s best asset as a player was his shooting, and Van Exel shot better than he did from three and from the FT line consistently throughout their respective careers. The fact that his Ast Rates and Defensive Ratings put Cheaney’s to shame is just gravy in this argument. The two players were not nearly on the same level.

Isaiah Rider is an interesting case. He wasn’t consistent throughout his career, but his peak was far better than anything Cheaney produced. He was never a great defender, but compared to Calbert he was Gary freaking Payton. I included him on this team because he’s the only guard in his draft class with any real post-up game to speak of.

Lucious Harris is a guy who is actually more around Cal Cheaney’s level. They were both hired gun-type guys who could get you some instant offense and very little defense. The reason I chose Harris was that his 2002 season was slightly better than Cheaney’s 1994 season. Keep in mind, I’m looking only at absolute peak production.

I’m open to debating which players I’ve put on these teams, but Georghe Muresan? Cal Cheaney? Can you really make a reasonable argument for their inclusion or are you just pulling this stuff from your anecdotal knowledge of these players and their name recognition?

Can you explain to me how any season Sam Dalembert and/or Troy Murphy has played is better than the year Brendan Haywood has been having this season? Have you paid attention to the Wizards at all this year?

__________________
But that's just me.