Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,135 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Randolph is a better scorer and rebounder but his defense is among the worst of all PFs (starters and bench warmers) in the league. Martin is decent in everything, good in nothing except for being a running forward.

I say Martin.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,131 Posts
I don't see Randolph as an important part of a winning team. He's a ballhog and he can't play defense. Martin is probably the "worse" player of the two, but he can be the second or third option on a good team and he would accept that role, unlike Randolph.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,393 Posts
Randolph. He's an extremely talented offensive weapon. He has large defensive deficiencies, but I'd much rather have one player who is great at one thing even if it comes at the cost of other areas in his game. Martin is just well, good. He's not great at anything, and I never was one who thought his defense was quite what it was hyped up to be. He's a good to very good defender, but not a great one.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,135 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Yyzlin said:
Randolph. He's an extremely talented offensive weapon. He has large defensive deficiencies, but I'd much rather have one player who is great at one thing even if it comes at the cost of other areas in his game. Martin is just well, good. He's not great at anything, and I never was one who thought his defense was quite what it was hyped up to be. He's a good to very good defender, but not a great one.
I'd rather have the player that's good at all things, than great at one.

And Randolph isn't an extremely talented offensive weapon. He's a talented scorer, but there are other areas of offensive besides just scoring. Like passing, which he is not good at. His defensive deficiencies can't be overlooked, in my opinion. Any PF with any scoring ability at all can pretty much score at will. I remember earlier this year when they played the Suns, that was the game when Amare had (i think), 50 points. How do you cover that up if you want to build a championship team? As soon as you play a team with a good PF, he's going to dominate the series.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,763 Posts
Pan Mengtu said:
I'd rather have the player that's good at all things, than great at one.

And Randolph isn't an extremely talented offensive weapon. He's a talented scorer, but there are other areas of offensive besides just scoring. Like passing, which he is not good at. His defensive deficiencies can't be overlooked, in my opinion. Any PF with any scoring ability at all can pretty much score at will. I remember earlier this year when they played the Suns, that was the game when Amare had (i think), 50 points. How do you cover that up if you want to build a championship team? As soon as you play a team with a good PF, he's going to dominate the series.
Not only did Amare score 50, he went 20-27.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,393 Posts
Pan Mengtu said:
I'd rather have the player that's good at all things, than great at one.

And Randolph isn't an extremely talented offensive weapon. He's a talented scorer, but there are other areas of offensive besides just scoring. Like passing, which he is not good at. His defensive deficiencies can't be overlooked, in my opinion. Any PF with any scoring ability at all can pretty much score at will. I remember earlier this year when they played the Suns, that was the game when Amare had (i think), 50 points. How do you cover that up if you want to build a championship team? As soon as you play a team with a good PF, he's going to dominate the series.
For a PF, scoring is the most important aspect of one's offense. Passing is nice, but not a priority. I agree that an elite PF would probably take Randolph to school and that's a weakness I acknowledged. However, it isn't something that can't be amended somewhat. If you have an athletic, defensive minded center and small forward, bringing quick double teams would help cover up Randolph's poor man defense.

I'm merely stating that Randolph has less weaknesses that Martin. Martin cannot create quality shots for himself. He's a poor passer as well. He's not a great rebounder. He's above average at one thing, and that's defense.
 

·
do better
Joined
·
41,522 Posts
I'm taking Martin. As mentioned before, yes, Randolph is a talented scorer, but he's a black hole and doesn't do much of anything else. Martin is more athletic, runs the floor, and he defends. Randolph is a difficult player to manage, because he's the selfish kind of player that thinks he's a number one option, but truly isn't. Neither are franchise players. But I'm taking Martin because he'd be a better no. 2 or 3 then Randolph, who's all scoring. I think all Martin needs is a good PG and a running system to be used the best, but he can adapt and still be respectable. How effective would Randolph be if the ball wasn't going down into him every possession?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,135 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
What "weaknesses"? I consider a weakness to be something a player is bad at. Martin is not "bad" at any of these things. The only weakness I will acknowledge in Martin is that his post game leaves a lot to be desire, but he's a very good running PF. For some reason people will only acknowledge the half-court portion of a forwards game, while guards can be good in the half-court or full-court. Nonetheless, Martin is still scoring 15ppg without the Jason Kidd excuse. That's only 4 points less than Randolph, so I think their scoring differences are a bit exaggerated. As I said, Martin is very good at running the floor, and I don't think it's fair that this aspect should be ignored. Also I don't agree that Martin's passing is on the same level as Randolph. He doesn't show any special passing ability, but I don't see him making bad passes either, so I think he's fine in that area. Randolph, on the other hand, doesn't pass at all. I'll take the average passer over the one who doesn't pass in that category.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,135 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
In everything else Martin is at least average. His rebounding isn't what it should be, and not as good as Randolph's, but it's still average. He averaged 8 and 9 rpg in his last two seasons in New Jersey, that's not bad at all. His defense is good, though he doesn't dominate like I think he's capable of. I think this has something to do with having to fight with Camby for paint domination; I feel he was a better defender last year.

My point is that even Martin's worst aspects, like half-court scoring, he's still good at.
 

·
do better
Joined
·
41,522 Posts
Martin probably also has the intangibles people talk about with playoff experience, and the all important passion.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,620 Posts
white360 said:
Martin haven't been himself since he lest NJ
You mean since he left Jason Kidd and stopped being spoon fed alley oops and layups.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,620 Posts
Pan Mengtu said:
Yeah, his 1ppg less than last year really exposed him for what he really is.
Hmm... good point, my bad. I guess he was never really that good, just seems like he used to be more high profile.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,393 Posts
Pan Mengtu said:
What "weaknesses"? I consider a weakness to be something a player is bad at. Martin is not "bad" at any of these things. The only weakness I will acknowledge in Martin is that his post game leaves a lot to be desire, but he's a very good running PF. For some reason people will only acknowledge the half-court portion of a forwards game, while guards can be good in the half-court or full-court. Nonetheless, Martin is still scoring 15ppg without the Jason Kidd excuse. That's only 4 points less than Randolph, so I think their scoring differences are a bit exaggerated. As I said, Martin is very good at running the floor, and I don't think it's fair that this aspect should be ignored. Also I don't agree that Martin's passing is on the same level as Randolph. He doesn't show any special passing ability, but I don't see him making bad passes either, so I think he's fine in that area. Randolph, on the other hand, doesn't pass at all. I'll take the average passer over the one who doesn't pass in that category.
A weakness is something other teams can expose. Martin's lack of a post game is something that is his weakness. He's an athletic power forward, but his offensive game is hampered in a slow, half court based game. Basically, my point is, Randolph's advantage in scoring and rebounding outweigh Martin's advantage on defense. Martin just really isn't anything all that special. I'd rather have Abdul Rahim as well for what it's worth.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,135 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
How can teams expose Martin's lack of a strong post game? You play off him and he'll throw it down hard or can hit a decent jumpshot. So I don't know what you mean by exposing his post game. He's not going to kill anyone down low, but he holds his own. Randolph is better in a half-court game, Martin is better in a full-court game. Why is one better than the other?

I don't agree that Randolph's (marginal) advantages in scoring and rebounding outweigh his defense. I think one-dimensional players are often overrated. Look at the Timberwolves. Aside from Garnett, everyone else is completely one-dimensional so they wind up getting stomped by less "talented" teams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,393 Posts
Pan Mengtu said:
How can teams expose Martin's lack of a strong post game? You play off him and he'll throw it down hard or can hit a decent jumpshot. So I don't know what you mean by exposing his post game. He's not going to kill anyone down low, but he holds his own. Randolph is better in a half-court game, Martin is better in a full-court game. Why is one better than the other?
1. Basketball is much more of a half court game than a full court game.
2. Why would you play off Martin when he doesn't have a strong post game? Make him create his shot and let him throw up his ugly hook and garbage shots.
3. He doesn't have a jumpshot anyway. He has one of the worst jumpshooting percentages among power forwards in the league.

I don't agree that Randolph's (marginal) advantages in scoring and rebounding outweigh his defense. I think one-dimensional players are often overrated. Look at the Timberwolves. Aside from Garnett, everyone else is completely one-dimensional so they wind up getting stomped by less "talented" teams.
No, the TWolves get stomped simply because almost all of them lack one dimension of basketball. Defense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,487 Posts
white360 said:
that's because he had a great pg to pass to him. Kidd.
Do you think James Whorty would have been as good without Magic ?
A quick side note: Worthy was a better player with Magic setting him up, but let's face it, Worthy was a HOF in his own right. A very, very good SF.

I would take Martin. I like both players quite a bit, but ZBo is the type of player that IMO, you can't build a team around. But at the same time, he is a player who can play 2nd or 3rd fiddle, while providing good team basketball. He's a #1 option, but because his defense and passing are so lacking, I would take Martin. K-Mart can provide defense, hustle, while not hogging the ball.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top